Discussion:
Jerry Brown Promotes Mass Immigration and then Blames Fires on Climate Change Which is Caused by Mass Immigration
(too old to reply)
mg
2017-12-29 22:35:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns

CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017

California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.

Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."

Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.

In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contraception is a key in controlling the proliferation
of unusual weather that is endangering the world.
-- Al Gore & Bill Gates, World Economic Forum, 2014

---------------------------------------------------------
"Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases
we do not yet understand, the modern plague of over-
population is soluble by means we have discovered and with
resources we possess. What is lacking is not
sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal
consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education
of the billions who are its victims."
--Martin Luther King, Jr., acceptance speech, Margaret
Sanger award in human rights 1966; Lamont Hempil
Sustainable communities.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-12-29 23:40:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
mg
2017-12-29 23:52:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
My heart surgery last month really got me thinking about my
mortality and my age and now I find myself thinking about it
a lot. I'm probably thinking about it too much. So, I hope I
get off this kick pretty soon. However, at the age of 76, I
think it's only natural for one to realize that one's days
left on this planet are limited.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-12-30 00:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
My heart surgery last month really got me thinking about my
mortality and my age and now I find myself thinking about it
a lot. I'm probably thinking about it too much. So, I hope I
get off this kick pretty soon. However, at the age of 76, I
think it's only natural for one to realize that one's days
left on this planet are limited.
You were gone for three weeks, but that was the
surgery and recuperation, how long did you have
to wait after you were diagnosed before you got
the surgery. I was diagnosed no later than
early October, more likely September, and my
surgery date is still (hopefully) some time in
January, not yet specified. I was eager for
surgery in October, and have just been going
downhill ever since, with three machine scans,
and a tracheal scan yesterday, and 51,362
"blood tests", pretty much one a week on
average though there was one week when I had
to go in three separate days for blood tests. It's
a royal pain in the butt. Today I got called for
yet another blood test and I hit the roof in a
mild way, since I was feeling particular
wobbly this morning, had just had the tracheal
scan yesterday, and had just had a blood test
three days ago which showed that my red blood
cell count was only half what it should be.
I had a transfusion a couple of months ago
which really helped temporarily, and I've been
pleading for another one. There are just not
enough heart surgeons to handle the load IMO.
Getting to heart surgery is like driving home
along route 101 at rush hour when there's a
ball game at Candelstick park. (I had to do
that a few times, until I realized that even
though taking 280 home was longer and more
out of the way, it was a lot more peaceful.)
mg
2017-12-30 17:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
My heart surgery last month really got me thinking about my
mortality and my age and now I find myself thinking about it
a lot. I'm probably thinking about it too much. So, I hope I
get off this kick pretty soon. However, at the age of 76, I
think it's only natural for one to realize that one's days
left on this planet are limited.
You were gone for three weeks, but that was the
surgery and recuperation, how long did you have
to wait after you were diagnosed before you got
the surgery. I was diagnosed no later than
early October, more likely September, and my
surgery date is still (hopefully) some time in
January, not yet specified. I was eager for
surgery in October, and have just been going
downhill ever since, with three machine scans,
and a tracheal scan yesterday, and 51,362
"blood tests", pretty much one a week on
average though there was one week when I had
to go in three separate days for blood tests. It's
a royal pain in the butt. Today I got called for
yet another blood test and I hit the roof in a
mild way, since I was feeling particular
wobbly this morning, had just had the tracheal
scan yesterday, and had just had a blood test
three days ago which showed that my red blood
cell count was only half what it should be.
I had a transfusion a couple of months ago
which really helped temporarily, and I've been
pleading for another one. There are just not
enough heart surgeons to handle the load IMO.
Getting to heart surgery is like driving home
along route 101 at rush hour when there's a
ball game at Candelstick park. (I had to do
that a few times, until I realized that even
though taking 280 home was longer and more
out of the way, it was a lot more peaceful.)
I had open-heart surgery and there's definitely no waiting
list for regular, open-heart surgery. Is there a waiting
list, though, in Utah, for non-invasive transcatheter
surgery (TAVR)? I was looking at the possibility of having
TAVR surgery for awhile and nobody mentioned anything about
a waiting list, so I don't think so. I don't know, for sure,
though.

A little more than 4 weeks has gone by now since I had my
surgery, incidentally, so there's good news for me now: It's
legal for me to drive a car, again. :-)
rumpelstiltskin
2017-12-30 19:53:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
My heart surgery last month really got me thinking about my
mortality and my age and now I find myself thinking about it
a lot. I'm probably thinking about it too much. So, I hope I
get off this kick pretty soon. However, at the age of 76, I
think it's only natural for one to realize that one's days
left on this planet are limited.
You were gone for three weeks, but that was the
surgery and recuperation, how long did you have
to wait after you were diagnosed before you got
the surgery. I was diagnosed no later than
early October, more likely September, and my
surgery date is still (hopefully) some time in
January, not yet specified. I was eager for
surgery in October, and have just been going
downhill ever since, with three machine scans,
and a tracheal scan yesterday, and 51,362
"blood tests", pretty much one a week on
average though there was one week when I had
to go in three separate days for blood tests. It's
a royal pain in the butt. Today I got called for
yet another blood test and I hit the roof in a
mild way, since I was feeling particular
wobbly this morning, had just had the tracheal
scan yesterday, and had just had a blood test
three days ago which showed that my red blood
cell count was only half what it should be.
I had a transfusion a couple of months ago
which really helped temporarily, and I've been
pleading for another one. There are just not
enough heart surgeons to handle the load IMO.
Getting to heart surgery is like driving home
along route 101 at rush hour when there's a
ball game at Candelstick park. (I had to do
that a few times, until I realized that even
though taking 280 home was longer and more
out of the way, it was a lot more peaceful.)
I had open-heart surgery and there's definitely no waiting
list for regular, open-heart surgery. Is there a waiting
list, though, in Utah, for non-invasive transcatheter
surgery (TAVR)? I was looking at the possibility of having
TAVR surgery for awhile and nobody mentioned anything about
a waiting list, so I don't think so. I don't know, for sure,
though.
A little more than 4 weeks has gone by now since I had my
surgery, incidentally, so there's good news for me now: It's
legal for me to drive a car, again. :-)
It's been nearly four months of a wait already for me.
That's "normal" around here, and also "normal" most
places, I hear. You were very, very lucky, it seems to
me, to get such prompt service. I am hoping for TAVR.
I've had three "scans" so far and 152,786,105 blood tests.
Plus a transfusion (which did a lot of good temporarily)
and two iron infusions (which did nothing that I could
detect). My red blood cell count is half the normal right
now, and I've been pleading for another transfusion,
since it will be at least three weeks or a month still
before I get the operation. Yesterday I walked one block
down to the expensive supermarket I usually avoid, to
check out their cat food, found that it cost nearly twice
the price as for the same brands as at Foodsco or Target,
so I just walked back. Walking back that one block uphill
was really difficult for me. For the last couple of weeks,
I've been mostly sitting in front of the computer or lying
in bed watching 1970's reruns of "The Match Game" on
TV. I did catch "The Day the Dinosaurs Died" recently
though, which was very good.

Uphill and downhill, and even walking on pavement
at all, are difficult for me at the moment. I have no
problem driving, or walking on the level in markets
though. I'm about to catch two busses to Target,
which will involve very little walking. The 33 Ashbury
has a stop on my block, from which I can disembark
at 16th and Mission to catch the 14 Mission just by
crossing the street, and that bus has a stop right in
front of the 4th & Mission Target. It's great living in
a compact city that has such excellent public
transportation - very expensive public transportation,
but free for old codgers like me.

I suppose I should shave first. I haven't been
shaving much, since I haven't been leaving my flat
much, except to go to the hospital for yet more
blood tests, sometimes more than once a week,
for the last 3-1/2 months. That's a big chunk of
my life to be sitting around waiting for an
operation, unable to do much of anything.
islander
2017-12-30 02:02:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.

We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
El Castor
2017-12-30 10:29:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.

BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-12-30 14:20:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
islander
2017-12-30 16:00:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
El Castor
2017-12-31 07:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
islander
2017-12-31 16:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
El Castor
2017-12-31 20:13:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.

Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
Loading Image...
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
islander
2018-01-01 02:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.

The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
El Castor
2018-01-01 09:58:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.

"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
islander
2018-01-01 15:11:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.

But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.

The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-01 20:32:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
El Castor
2018-01-01 22:29:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.

Please note -- the following countries ALL have fertility rates BELOW
THE REPLACEMENT RATE. You do know what that "BELOW THE REPLACEMENT
RATE" means, right? Go preach your bullshit in the Congo or Zambia.
They will probably have you for dinner, obviating the need for a
cliff.


119 Antigua and Barbuda 2.00
120 Iceland 2.00
121 Guyana 2.00
122 Colombia 2.00
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
d***@agent.com
2018-01-04 07:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
Post by El Castor
Please note -- the following countries ALL have fertility rates BELOW
THE REPLACEMENT RATE. You do know what that "BELOW THE REPLACEMENT
RATE" means, right? Go preach your bullshit in the Congo or Zambia.
They will probably have you for dinner, obviating the need for a
cliff.
119 Antigua and Barbuda 2.00
120 Iceland 2.00
121 Guyana 2.00
122 Colombia 2.00
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
El Castor
2018-01-04 08:18:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Please note -- the following countries ALL have fertility rates BELOW
THE REPLACEMENT RATE. You do know what that "BELOW THE REPLACEMENT
RATE" means, right? Go preach your bullshit in the Congo or Zambia.
They will probably have you for dinner, obviating the need for a
cliff.
119 Antigua and Barbuda 2.00
120 Iceland 2.00
121 Guyana 2.00
122 Colombia 2.00
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
d***@agent.com
2018-01-05 17:20:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
El Castor
2018-01-06 21:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????

123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
d***@agent.com
2018-01-06 23:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?

Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
Post by El Castor
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
El Castor
2018-01-07 08:16:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
Post by El Castor
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
Your thinking is outdated -- Read This:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."

"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7

"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500

"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
d***@agent.com
2018-01-08 04:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html

World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017

The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
White Ryder
2018-01-08 07:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
One good decade of flue and plague will take care of that
population problem.

All the city people will die there or be killed trying to invade
the rural areas in search of food.

It's been happening all through history. Liberals and Democrats
devote their energy to unrealistic goals and only revise history
so they don't learn from previous mistakes.
El Castor
2018-01-09 21:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
d***@agent.com
2018-01-10 17:59:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
allcoholics and addicts.

The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
El Castor
2018-01-10 22:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
allcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside, you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?

Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 01:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:11:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside, you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do.
El Castor
2018-01-11 01:46:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:11:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside, you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do.
We are in total and complete agreement. (-8
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 07:59:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:46:39 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:11:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside, you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do.
We are in total and complete agreement. (-8
That's scary!
d***@agent.com
2018-01-11 07:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
Post by El Castor
...you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
El Castor
2018-01-11 08:49:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know, but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer. Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.

Perhaps genetically engineered designer babies or a world dominated by
artificial intelligence will be the next step in evolution?

What's your solution? Socialism?
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
...you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
d***@agent.com
2018-01-11 17:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know, but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer. Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.
Perhaps genetically engineered designer babies or a world dominated by
artificial intelligence will be the next step in evolution?
What's your solution? Socialism?
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 19:20:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:46:36 -0500, ***@agent.com wrote:
<snip>
Post by d***@agent.com
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
I hope you're not getting any flu shots, or ever
visiting a doctor yourself, and are eating nothing
but potato chips and ice cream. Potato chips
and ice cream are delicious, and you wouldn't
want to be a hypocrite, would you?
d***@agent.com
2018-01-12 17:21:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by d***@agent.com
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
I hope you're not getting any flu shots, or ever
visiting a doctor yourself, and are eating nothing
but potato chips and ice cream. Potato chips
and ice cream are delicious, and you wouldn't
want to be a hypocrite, would you?
You haven't given us *your* plan for addressing the main
cause of conflict throughout history: selfishness gone wild!

You don't defeat an idea with objections & criticism!
You defeat an idea with a *better* idea!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 18:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by d***@agent.com
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
I hope you're not getting any flu shots, or ever
visiting a doctor yourself, and are eating nothing
but potato chips and ice cream. Potato chips
and ice cream are delicious, and you wouldn't
want to be a hypocrite, would you?
You haven't given us *your* plan for addressing the main
cause of conflict throughout history: selfishness gone wild!
I and others have pointed out that the American
birthrate is already below replacement, as also with
the more prosperous parts of Europe, and also
Japan I think.

As to "selfishness gone wild", I agree with you
on that. It's been the American disease for a long
time but it's really disgusting now. My solution for
that would be a 98% top rate for taxation, perhaps
even 100% above a certain level, with long jail
sentences for offshoring profits and other dodges.
And tariffs - I strongly advocate tariffs for anything
made outside the USA then imported, whether by
an American company or not.

Besides an income tax, I'd also support a wealth
tax, though that would hurt me personally much
more than a higher income tax since I don't have
all that much "income" these days..
Post by d***@agent.com
You don't defeat an idea with objections & criticism!
You defeat an idea with a *better* idea!
d***@agent.com
2018-01-15 06:41:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by d***@agent.com
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
I hope you're not getting any flu shots, or ever
visiting a doctor yourself, and are eating nothing
but potato chips and ice cream. Potato chips
and ice cream are delicious, and you wouldn't
want to be a hypocrite, would you?
You haven't given us *your* plan for addressing the main
cause of conflict throughout history: selfishness gone wild!
As to "selfishness gone wild", I agree with you
on that. It's been the American disease for a long
time but it's really disgusting now.
Kleptocracy is a government with corrupt leaders (kleptocrats)
that use their power to exploit the people and natural resources
of their own territory in order to extend their personal wealth
and political power. Typically this system involves embezzlement
of funds at the expense of the wider population.

Kleptocracies are generally associated with dictatorships,
oligarchies, military juntas, or other forms of autocratic and
nepotist governments in which external oversight is impossible or
does not exist. This lack of oversight can be caused or exacerbated
by the ability of the kleptocratic officials to control both the
supply of public funds and the means of disbursal for those funds.
Kleptocratic rulers often treat their country's treasury as a
source of personal wealth, spending funds on luxury goods and
extravagances as they see fit. Many kleptocratic rulers secretly
transfer public funds into hidden personal numbered bank accounts
in foreign countries to provide for themselves if removed from power.

Kleptocracy is most common in developing countries whose economies
are based on the export of natural resources. Such export incomes
constitute a form of economic rent and are easier to siphon off
without causing the income to decrease.

A specific case of kleptocracy is Raubwirtschaft, German for
"plunder economy" or "rapine economy", where the whole economy of
the state is based on robbery, looting and plundering the conquered
territories. Such states are either in continuous warfare with
their neighbours or they simply milk their subjects as long as
they have any taxable assets. Arnold Toynbee has claimed the Roman
Empire was a Raubwirtschaft.

Effects
The effects of a kleptocratic regime or government on a nation are
typically adverse in regards to the welfare of the state's economy,
political affairs & civil rights. Kleptocratic governance typically
ruins prospects of foreign investment and drastically weakens the
domestic market and cross-border trade. As kleptocracies often
embezzle money from their citizens by misusing funds derived from
tax payments, or engage heavily in money laundering schemes, they
tend to heavily degrade quality of life for citizens.

In addition, the money that kleptocrats steal is diverted from
funds earmarked for public amenities such as the building of
hospitals, schools, roads, parks – having further adverse effects
on the quality of life of citizens. The informal oligarchy that
results from a kleptocratic elite subverts democracy (or any other
political format).

Examples
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first use in
English occurs in the publication Indicator of 1819: “Titular
ornaments, common to Spanish kleptocracy.”

In early 2004, the German anti-corruption NGO Transparency Int'l
released a list of what it believes to be the ten most self-
enriching leaders in the past two decades. In order of amount
allegedly stolen USD, they were:

Former Indonesian President Suharto ($15 – $35 billion)
Former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos (at least $10 billion
by 1986, equivalent to about $21.6 billion in 2014 dollars)
Former Zairian President Mobutu Sese Seko ($5 billion)
Former Nigerian Head of State Sani Abacha ($2 – $5 billion)
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Miloševic ($1 billion)
Former Haitian President Jean-Claude Duvalier ("Baby Doc")
($300 – $800 million)
Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori ($600 million)
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko ($114 – $200 million)
Former Nicaraguan President Arnoldo Alemán ($100 million)
Former Philippine President Joseph Estrada ($78 – $80 million)

The Russian president Vladimir Putin is alleged to be the "head
of the clan", whose assets are estimated at over $200 billion.
A list of Russian and Ukrainian politicians associated with
"kleptocratic style" has been published by the Kleptocracy
Archives project.

Sources have also alleged that former Egyptian President Hosni
Mubarak stole up to $70 billion.

In addition, other sources have listed former PLO Chairman Yasser
Arafat as having stolen $1 to $10 billion; & Pakistani President
Asif Ali Zardari to have received kickbacks on contracts and
misappropriating public funds, siphoning over $2 billion to his
Swiss accounts. Moreover, the International Consortium of
Investigative Journalist have outlined that current Prime Minister
of Pakistan Nawas Sharif has created offshore companies through
the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca to hide vast amount of
money illegally transferred from Pakistan in the name of children.

In May 2017, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
released a report detailing what it called a kleptocratic network
across the government and private sector in Honduras.

Nursultan Nazarbayev is a head of the Kazakhstan ruling clan with
$7 billion assets.

China's former prime minister, Wen Jiabao, left office in 2013
with his close relatives controlling assets worth at least
$2.7 billion. These revelations were censored in print and
censored online in China.

The term kleptocracy was also used to refer to the Russian economy,
soon after the Soviet collapse in 1991. The "democrats", led by
Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais, freed prices in 1992 and
unleashed hyperinflation before they privatized Russia's assets.
Most Russian citizens lost their savings in only a few weeks.
A few billionaire "oligarchs" amassed fortunes not by creating
new enterprises, but by arbitraging the huge difference between
old domestic prices for Russian commodities and the prices
prevailing on the world market. Instead of investing in the
Russian economy, they stashed billions of dollars in Swiss bank
accounts. Experts estimate that as much as $15 billion left Russia
each year as either capital flight or laundered money from illegal
transactions. Referring to Russia, Daniel Kimmage also used the
terms: "kerdocracy" ("rule based on the desire for material gain")
or "khrematisamenocracy" ("rule by those who transact business for
their own profit").

South Sudan obtained independence in July 2011 as a kleptocracy –
a militarized, corrupt neo-patrimonial system of governance. By
the time of independence, the South Sudanese “political marketplace”
was so expensive that the country's comparatively copious revenue
was consumed by the military-political patronage system, with
almost nothing left for public services, development or institution
building. The efforts of national technocrats and foreign donors
produced bubbles of institutional integrity but the system as a
whole was entirely resistant to reform. The January 2012 shutdown
of oil production bankrupted the system. Even an experienced and
talented political business manager would have struggled, and
President Salva Kiir did not display the required skills. No
sooner had shots been fired than the compact holding the SPLA
together fell apart and civil war ensued.

In 2016, the FBI announced it was trying to retrieve around
$1 billion in funds associated with 1Malaysia Development Berhad,
an investment fund owned by the government of Malaysia. This was
the largest single action ever brought under the Kleptocracy Asset
Recovery Initiative.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
My solution for
that would be a 98% top rate for taxation, perhaps
even 100% above a certain level, with long jail
sentences for offshoring profits and other dodges.
And tariffs - I strongly advocate tariffs for anything
made outside the USA then imported, whether by
an American company or not.
Besides an income tax, I'd also support a wealth
tax, though that would hurt me personally much
more than a higher income tax since I don't have
all that much "income" these days..
Post by d***@agent.com
You don't defeat an idea with objections & criticism!
You defeat an idea with a *better* idea!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-15 14:47:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
As to "selfishness gone wild", I agree with you
on that. It's been the American disease for a long
time but it's really disgusting now.
Kleptocracy is a government with corrupt leaders (kleptocrats)
that use their power to exploit the people and natural resources
of their own territory in order to extend their personal wealth
and political power. Typically this system involves embezzlement
of funds at the expense of the wider population.
Kleptocracies are generally associated with dictatorships,
oligarchies, military juntas, or other forms of autocratic and
nepotist governments in which external oversight is impossible or
does not exist. This lack of oversight can be caused or exacerbated
by the ability of the kleptocratic officials to control both the
supply of public funds and the means of disbursal for those funds.
We have kleptocracy in the USA right now IMO. Examples
are offshoring, the Supreme Court "Citizens United" decision,
the practice of giving lucrative jobs or speaking fees to retired
politicians who "played ball" (as a flag to politicians still in
office of the personal benefits of buddying up to Big Business),
trade agreements, and Trump's new tax bill.

<snip>
d***@agent.com
2018-01-15 19:56:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
As to "selfishness gone wild", I agree with you
on that. It's been the American disease for a long
time but it's really disgusting now.
Kleptocracy is a government with corrupt leaders (kleptocrats)
that use their power to exploit the people and natural resources
of their own territory in order to extend their personal wealth
and political power. Typically this system involves embezzlement
of funds at the expense of the wider population.
Kleptocracies are generally associated with dictatorships,
oligarchies, military juntas, or other forms of autocratic and
nepotist governments in which external oversight is impossible or
does not exist. This lack of oversight can be caused or exacerbated
by the ability of the kleptocratic officials to control both the
supply of public funds and the means of disbursal for those funds.
We have kleptocracy in the USA right now IMO. Examples
are offshoring, the Supreme Court "Citizens United" decision,
the practice of giving lucrative jobs or speaking fees to retired
politicians who "played ball" (as a flag to politicians still in
office of the personal benefits of buddying up to Big Business),
trade agreements, and Trump's new tax bill.
In early 2004, the German anti-corruption NGO Transparency Int'l
released a list of what it believes to be the ten most self-
enriching leaders in the past two decades. In order of amount
allegedly stolen USD, they were:

Former Indonesian President Suharto ($15 – $35 billion)
Former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos (at least $10 billion
by 1986, equivalent to about $21.6 billion in 2014 dollars)
Former Zairian President Mobutu Sese Seko ($5 billion)
Former Nigerian Head of State Sani Abacha ($2 – $5 billion)
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Miloševic ($1 billion)
Former Haitian President Jean-Claude Duvalier ("Baby Doc")
($300 – $800 million)
Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori ($600 million)
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko ($114 – $200 million)
Former Nicaraguan President Arnoldo Alemán ($100 million)
Former Philippine President Joseph Estrada ($78 – $80 million)

The Russian president Vladimir Putin is alleged to be the "head
of the clan", whose assets are estimated at over $200 billion.
A list of Russian and Ukrainian politicians associated with
"kleptocratic style" has been published by the Kleptocracy
Archives project.

Sources have also alleged that former Egyptian President Hosni
Mubarak stole up to $70 billion.

In addition, other sources have listed former PLO Chairman Yasser
Arafat as having stolen $1 to $10 billion; & Pakistani President
Asif Ali Zardari to have received kickbacks on contracts and
misappropriating public funds, siphoning over $2 billion to his
Swiss accounts. Moreover, the International Consortium of
Investigative Journalist have outlined that current Prime Minister
of Pakistan Nawas Sharif has created offshore companies through
the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca to hide vast amount of
money illegally transferred from Pakistan in the name of children.

In May 2017, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
released a report detailing what it called a kleptocratic network
across the government and private sector in Honduras.

Nursultan Nazarbayev is a head of the Kazakhstan ruling clan with
$7 billion assets.

China's former prime minister, Wen Jiabao, left office in 2013
with his close relatives controlling assets worth at least
$2.7 billion. These revelations were censored in print and
censored online in China.

The term kleptocracy was also used to refer to the Russian economy,
soon after the Soviet collapse in 1991. The "democrats", led by
Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais, freed prices in 1992 and
unleashed hyperinflation before they privatized Russia's assets.
Most Russian citizens lost their savings in only a few weeks.
A few billionaire "oligarchs" amassed fortunes not by creating
new enterprises, but by arbitraging the huge difference between
old domestic prices for Russian commodities and the prices
prevailing on the world market. Instead of investing in the
Russian economy, they stashed billions of dollars in Swiss bank
accounts. Experts estimate that as much as $15 billion left Russia
each year as either capital flight or laundered money from illegal
transactions. Referring to Russia, Daniel Kimmage also used the
terms: "kerdocracy" ("rule based on the desire for material gain")
or "khrematisamenocracy" ("rule by those who transact business for
their own profit").

South Sudan obtained independence in July 2011 as a kleptocracy –
a militarized, corrupt neo-patrimonial system of governance. By
the time of independence, the South Sudanese “political marketplace”
was so expensive that the country's comparatively copious revenue
was consumed by the military-political patronage system, with
almost nothing left for public services, development or institution
building. The efforts of national technocrats and foreign donors
produced bubbles of institutional integrity but the system as a
whole was entirely resistant to reform. The January 2012 shutdown
of oil production bankrupted the system. Even an experienced and
talented political business manager would have struggled, and
President Salva Kiir did not display the required skills. No
sooner had shots been fired than the compact holding the SPLA
together fell apart and civil war ensued.

In 2016, the FBI announced it was trying to retrieve around
$1 billion in funds associated with 1Malaysia Development Berhad,
an investment fund owned by the government of Malaysia. This was
the largest single action ever brought under the Kleptocracy Asset
Recovery Initiative.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-15 22:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:56:20 -0500, ***@agent.com wrote:

I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-16 21:50:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
And you're not concerned with conflict out in
the world, and the causes thereof.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-16 22:03:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
And you're not concerned with conflict out in
the world, and the causes thereof.
Now you're confusing me. I thought you wanted
me to die of influenza.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-18 06:48:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
And you're not concerned with conflict out in
the world, and the causes thereof.
Now you're confusing me. I thought you wanted
me to die of influenza.
We (the USA) have spent $$trillions on battles around
the world in the last 30 years! You've been paying
for that, haven't you?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-18 08:14:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
And you're not concerned with conflict out in
the world, and the causes thereof.
Now you're confusing me. I thought you wanted
me to die of influenza.
We (the USA) have spent $$trillions on battles around
the world in the last 30 years! You've been paying
for that, haven't you?
Yes and I disapprove mightily with the reasons,
pretexts or scarcely-believably bizarre levels of
capitalistic imperiousness for fighting most of those
wars, and also with overt and covert dirty dealings
toward the same purpose, known or still hidden.

I still don't want to die of influenza. You can,
if you want.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-19 02:16:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I live in the USA, pay taxes in the USA, and get my
SS check and medicare from the USA, so I'm much
more concerned with kleptocracy that affects the
people in the USA than anywhere else.
And you're not concerned with conflict out in
the world, and the causes thereof.
Now you're confusing me. I thought you wanted
me to die of influenza.
We (the USA) have spent $$trillions on battles around
the world in the last 30 years! You've been paying
for that, haven't you?
Yes and I disapprove mightily with the reasons,
pretexts or scarcely-believably bizarre levels of
capitalistic imperiousness for fighting most of those
wars, and also with overt and covert dirty dealings
toward the same purpose, known or still hidden.
I still don't want to die of influenza. You can,
if you want.
You're not looking at the big picture; you're
just thinking of yourself!
d***@agent.com
2018-01-11 18:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
[...]
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know,
You don't know because you haven't been working on
the problem. You gave up, decades ago, like everyone else!
Post by mg
...but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer.
The only reason you're saying that is because you're not
looking at the big picture (don't even know what the
big picture is), you're just thinking of yourself and how
you don't want to have to get the flu!
Post by mg
Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.
Perhaps genetically engineered designer babies or a world dominated by
artificial intelligence will be the next step in evolution?
What's your solution? Socialism?
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
...you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
El Castor
2018-01-12 10:27:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by mg
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
[...]
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know,
You don't know because you haven't been working on
the problem. You gave up, decades ago, like everyone else!
Post by mg
...but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer.
The only reason you're saying that is because you're not
looking at the big picture (don't even know what the
big picture is), you're just thinking of yourself and how
you don't want to have to get the flu!
Post by mg
Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.
Perhaps genetically engineered designer babies or a world dominated by
artificial intelligence will be the next step in evolution?
What's your solution? Socialism?
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
...you seem to believe that flu shots (and other
inoculations?) should be limited or withheld to encourage more people
to die, therefore reducing the size of the human race. Right?
Do you and your family member get flu shots? If you have children, did
they receive the usual childhood vaccinations?
You don't like answering questions, do you? Like, do you and your
family forego flu shots and vaccinations in general -- or is dying
young something for other people to do? Well?

If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2. I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??

This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U

Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
d***@agent.com
2018-01-12 17:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 18:04:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.

So, did you get a flu shot? Or are you not going
to answer again.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-12 19:43:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
El Castor
2018-01-12 21:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
Hmmm, "never will". That gives me an idea -- more along the lines of
Never Again.

PLONK!! (an old UseNet term -- look it up)
d***@agent.com
2018-01-13 00:25:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
Hmmm, "never will". That gives me an idea -- more along the lines of
Never Again.
The only reason you're pursuing this line is to avoid
the issue of dealing with Selfishness Gone Wild, as
it relates to our Fearless Leaders. lol
Post by El Castor
PLONK!! (an old UseNet term -- look it up)
I've been on UseNet since 1990. Way ahead of you!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 21:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-13 00:26:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-13 01:03:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.

That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
islander
2018-01-13 15:43:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.
That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
Bonobos seem to be an exception to your rule.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex

We could take a lesson!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-13 17:18:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.
That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
Bonobos seem to be an exception to your rule.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex
We could take a lesson!
Our drives, as expressed by our genes, can't
learn anything! The bonobos are the ways they
are because millions of years of evolution
shaped them that way.
islander
2018-01-14 15:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.
That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
Bonobos seem to be an exception to your rule.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex
We could take a lesson!
Our drives, as expressed by our genes, can't
learn anything! The bonobos are the ways they
are because millions of years of evolution
shaped them that way.
Yes, but as thinking animals we do not have to be slave to our genes.
We have the ability to override the impulses of genes to control our
behavior. For example, our sexual behavior is strongly influenced (in a
bad way, IMV) by our Victorian era moral codes. Without that influence,
we might behave much more like bonobos (and probably be less prone to
violence).
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-14 17:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.
That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
Bonobos seem to be an exception to your rule.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex
We could take a lesson!
Our drives, as expressed by our genes, can't
learn anything! The bonobos are the ways they
are because millions of years of evolution
shaped them that way.
Yes, but as thinking animals we do not have to be slave to our genes.
We have the ability to override the impulses of genes to control our
behavior. For example, our sexual behavior is strongly influenced (in a
bad way, IMV) by our Victorian era moral codes. Without that influence,
we might behave much more like bonobos (and probably be less prone to
violence).
Civilization helps, but it's a veneer. The beast is
always underneath. As to the bonobos, they're
an exception among the apes, as far as I know.
(There might be some violence I'm not hearing
about.) As Pinker pointed out though, a man was
30 times more likely to be murdered in
Shakespeare's England than he is today. That
little fact obviously made a big impression on me,
since I keep repeating it. If while civilization was
producing what many feel is the greatest writer
of all time, that doesn't bode well for the future.

When we think of civilization in the USA, we're
thinking of non-thug people, disproportionately
white and Asian among themselves, though.
There's still an overabundance of white-on-black
and black-on-white and black-on-black violence
in the USA.

The majority of ape species are belligerent.
Unfortunately, we're in that majority, and I see
no sign of civilization completely ending it.
There's always going to be some of it, in
road-rage and ethnic clashes, and religious
warfare and murder and whatnot. We might
be able to get rid of religion - I'm optimistic
that will happen - and that will help a lot.
islander
2018-01-15 14:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
If you have been hard at work on this issue for years, I would expect
you to have something to say about fertility rates that have been
declining for years, and in the developed world are almost universally
below the replacement rate of 2.1 - 2.2.
Trends never reverse or change?
Post by El Castor
I would add that it seems
inexplicable to expect the residents of a country that is already
below replacement rate to give up vaccinations. The Congo may have
high rates, but should Italy see its population disappear to offset
high birth rates in Africa??
This Reuters article on Italy would seem very worrisome to me if I was
a resident of Italy...
"Births in Italy hit record low in 2016, population ages"
"The overall national average was 1.34 children per woman."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-birthrate/births-in-italy-hit-record-low-in-2016-population-ages-idUSKBN16D28U
Should Italy eliminate flu shots and vaccinations?
Every country should stop making flu shots, in order to address
the main cause of conflict: selfishness gone wild! How else can
you address that issue?
I don't think you ever responded to whether or not
you yourself got a flu shot for this year. I did, and
I'm certainly not apologizing for it. People may want
to kill me, but I don't want to die as long as life is
still worth living.
So, did you get a flu shot?
Nope. Never have, never will!
OK then. You're living by your principles. I don't
think that's wise of course, but I'm not the boss of you.
And you're avoiding the issue of how to address
the main cause of conflict in this world.
Conflict seems to be as unavoidable among
humans as it is among other apes, the reason
for which lies in the Natural Selection process
that "created" us IMV. One demonstratedly
effective way to mitigate it is to reduce the
population below replacement levels so that at
least having more people than a region can
sustain it will not be an aggravating factor. I
have addressed where that is happening: in
countries where children are not crucial to
scrabbling for a living, so that people keep
having more of them.
That's not by any means a complete solution.
Pinker points out that in Shakespeare's England,
when the population was much smaller than it
is today, a man was 30 times more likely to be
murdered than today, The most apparent
reason for that is "machismo", which is also a
product of Natural Selection, in all animals,
since genes naturally evolve to perpetuate
themselves against others. If they didn't, we'd
all still be microbes.
Bonobos seem to be an exception to your rule.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex
We could take a lesson!
Our drives, as expressed by our genes, can't
learn anything! The bonobos are the ways they
are because millions of years of evolution
shaped them that way.
Yes, but as thinking animals we do not have to be slave to our genes.
We have the ability to override the impulses of genes to control our
behavior. For example, our sexual behavior is strongly influenced (in a
bad way, IMV) by our Victorian era moral codes. Without that influence,
we might behave much more like bonobos (and probably be less prone to
violence).
Civilization helps, but it's a veneer. The beast is
always underneath. As to the bonobos, they're
an exception among the apes, as far as I know.
(There might be some violence I'm not hearing
about.) As Pinker pointed out though, a man was
30 times more likely to be murdered in
Shakespeare's England than he is today. That
little fact obviously made a big impression on me,
since I keep repeating it. If while civilization was
producing what many feel is the greatest writer
of all time, that doesn't bode well for the future.
When we think of civilization in the USA, we're
thinking of non-thug people, disproportionately
white and Asian among themselves, though.
There's still an overabundance of white-on-black
and black-on-white and black-on-black violence
in the USA.
The majority of ape species are belligerent.
Unfortunately, we're in that majority, and I see
no sign of civilization completely ending it.
There's always going to be some of it, in
road-rage and ethnic clashes, and religious
warfare and murder and whatnot. We might
be able to get rid of religion - I'm optimistic
that will happen - and that will help a lot.
If one navigates by the north star, you know that you will never reach
it, but you know that you are going in the right direction.

Civilization is like that.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-19 20:12:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know, but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer. Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.
When everyone is a farmer, overpopulation looks different.
That's why so many left the Eastern U.S. to settle the West.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-19 20:19:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
What will the world be like with 10 billion people?
Do you believe politics as usual will bring world peace?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2017/02/01/death-spiral-demographics-the-countries-shrinking-the-fastest/#243275a9b83c
"For most of recent history, the world has worried about the curse of
overpopulation. But in many countries, the problem may soon be too few
people, and of those, too many old ones. In 1995 only one country,
Italy, had more people over 65 than under 15; today there are 30 and
by 2020 that number will hit 35. Demographers estimate that global
population growth will end this century."
"Japan's population fell at the beginning of this year at the fastest
pace since 1968, when the earliest comparable figures started getting
collected."
http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-population-falling-faster-than-ever-before-2017-7
"Italy suffers drastic declining birth rate"
http://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/5500
"Shrinking China: A Demographic Crisis"
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/shrinking-china-demographic-crisis
https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/world-population-prospects-the-2017-revision.html
World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
21 June 2017
The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach
8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 & 11.2 billion in 2100,
according to a new United Nations report being launched today.
With roughly 83 million people being added to the world’s
population every year, the upward trend in population size is
expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will
continue to decline.
[...]
As long as we control our borders, the population of the Congo is
about as important as the population of Mars. If they are unable to
feed their people, they should starve. In any event, Africa excluded,
population of the developed world, China included, is below
replacement rate. India, at 2.40 is still above, but on a steady
decline. Find something else to worry about. Asteroid strike? Nuclear
war? Giant eruption in Yellowstone that would blanket the earth in a
volcanic winter? Solar flare that destroys our power grid? Gamma ray
burst from a distant star focused on the Earth, that strips away or
atmosphere? But if you believe humans have a duty to die, what's
keeping you?
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders, a
selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
Selfishness aside,
You haven't given us the remedy for the undisciplined craving
for more by political leaders, their selfishness gone wild, which
is the same problem alkies & addicts have!
I don't know, but if there is one, flu vaccine does not seem to be the
answer. Back in the day of Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun,
Genghis Khan, and Julius Caesar, over population was not the
motivator, but brutality was unparalleled.
When everyone is a farmer, overpopulation looks different.
That's why so many left the Eastern U.S. to settle the West.

d***@agent.com
2018-01-19 20:16:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Maybe your vision is faulty.
Has the fertility rate in the developed world been in a steady
decline, and has it fallen below the replacement rate -- YES or
NO?????
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynes 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Isl 1.85
148 Aruba (Neth) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 St Vincent/Gre 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 St Kitts/Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis/ Futuna 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad/Tobag 1.71
173 Turks/Caicos Is 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, PR of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 St Helena, Asc 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 St Pierre/Miqu 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat 1.33
217 Bosnia Herzeg 1.30
218 British Virgin Is 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico 1.22
221 Hong Kong 1.19
222 China, Republi 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
You're only telling /half/ the story. What about life expectancy?
d***@agent.com
2018-01-10 20:20:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
El Castor
2018-01-11 02:05:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin

I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 07:59:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
El Castor
2018-01-11 09:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...

32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
islander
2018-01-11 15:35:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
El Castor
2018-01-11 20:17:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.

Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.

An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
islander
2018-01-11 22:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.

Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
El Castor
2018-01-12 10:35:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 14:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 02:35:18 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
Amazingly, I agree with you on something.
islander
2018-01-12 15:48:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.

What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
El Castor
2018-01-12 21:53:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.
What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
Investigate. If you find something important, I think that would be
great, but after 8 years of Obama, you are back to blaming Republicans
again? Oh my.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-13 01:03:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:53:10 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.
What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
Investigate. If you find something important, I think that would be
great, but after 8 years of Obama, you are back to blaming Republicans
again? Oh my.
It's always safe to blame Republicans, because they never
have the best interests of the common people at heart.
El Castor
2018-01-13 20:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:53:10 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.
What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
Investigate. If you find something important, I think that would be
great, but after 8 years of Obama, you are back to blaming Republicans
again? Oh my.
It's always safe to blame Republicans, because they never
have the best interests of the common people at heart.
Wrong. Restricting immigration and bringing manufacturing back to the
US is central to the best interests of the common people -- and
opposed by Democrats.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-13 20:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 12:30:37 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:53:10 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.
What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
Investigate. If you find something important, I think that would be
great, but after 8 years of Obama, you are back to blaming Republicans
again? Oh my.
It's always safe to blame Republicans, because they never
have the best interests of the common people at heart.
Wrong. Restricting immigration and bringing manufacturing back to the
US is central to the best interests of the common people -- and
opposed by Democrats.
I'm certainly in favour of restricting immigration, and I
doubt many democratic people are enthusiastic about more
immigration. Maybe Democratic politicians are, because like
Republican politicians they're being paid off by Big Money,
and Big Money likes cheap labour.
El Castor
2018-01-14 08:57:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 12:30:37 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:53:10 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
I can sympathize with your attitude, but if you recall Jim Chamblee,
even he agreed on that issue -- the futility of ship loads of food for
Africa. Countries like those in Africa need to be able to care for
themselves. Ship loads of food enable over population, and the need
for even more ship loads next year. What those countries need is a
small sustainable population. This is a bit controversial, but from a
web site that lists world IQs by country, here are those with an
average below 75 ...
32 Mali 74
32 Namibia 74
33 Ghana 73
34 Tanzania 72
35 Central African Republic 71
35 Jamaica 71
35 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 71
35 Sudan 71
36 Antigua and Barbuda 70
36 Benin 70
36 Botswana 70
36 Rwanda 70
36 Togo 70
37 Burundi 69
37 Côte d'Ivoire 69
37 Ethiopia 69
37 Malawi 69
37 Niger 69
38 Angola 68
38 Burkina Faso 68
38 Chad 68
38 Djibouti i 68
38 Somalia 68
38 Swaziland 68
39 Dominica 67
39 Guinea 67
39 Guinea-Bissau 67
39 Haiti 67
39 Lesotho 67
39 Liberia 67
39 Saint Kitts and Nevis 67
39 São Tomé and Príncipe 67
40 The Gambia 66
41 Cameroon 64
41 Gabon 64
41 Mozambique 64
42 Saint Lucia 62
43 Equatorial Guinea 59
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
When Dr. Livingstone first visited the area near Lake Victoria around
1860, he found a people without a written language, calendar, or the
wheel.
You might want to compare your list to the Mothers' Index compiled by
savethechildren.org which includes statistics on health care, especially
health care during pregnancy. One cannot expect healthy brain
development if the mothers are prone to viral infection, stress,
malnutrition, and abuse during the first trimester.
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/SOWM-MOTHERS-INDEX-2013.PDF
Show me the proof that a good maternal environment will bring those 67
IQs up to 100+ and I will be glad to be convinced. Unfortunately you
can't. East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs in the
world, but not because of superior pre-natal care -- genetics.
Environment does play a role, but nutrition can't turn a midget into
an NBA star.
Jews make up less than 2/10ths of 1% of the World's population, and
22.5% of Nobel prize winners.
An interesting article ...
Gildea (1992): A lost IQ study of transracially adopted Koreans
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/02/16/gildea-1992-a-lost-iq-study-of-transracially-adopted-koreans/
Hmmm -- could it be Kimchi, rice, or?
The issue is correlation. You assume causality in your figures for
primarily black (or Asian or Ashkenazi Jews) but correlation does not
prove causality. Likewise, I point out correlation between poverty,
poor health care, stress, malnutrition and abuse during the first
trimester. While that also does not prove causality, it is given
credibility by what we know of how the brain develops. Your repeated
examples of adoption statistics are not relevant in that adoption occurs
after birth.
Otherwise, your sarcasm is not a very good argument, but typical of
right wing thinking.
Sarcasm, or not, facts are facts. Genetics have been shown to be the
single most important factor in IQ development -- certainly in the 50%
- 70% range. Why do I care? I care because the Left blames crime and
poverty on racism, while many on the Right blame laziness. It is
neither.
The studies that support the argument that genetics is the most
important factor in determining IQ are based on correlation. Most of
these studies do not take into account the basic biology of brain
development. The results are therefore biased in favor of genetics as a
cause. That is convenient for those who would like to believe that
there is a racial cause - after all, you can do nothing about ones race.
You and other conservatives use this argument against programs that
are designed to fight poverty, specifically for pregnant women, but more
broadly because it might change a lot of lives for the better. It is
far easier and less expensive to blame race.
What is the harm in investigating environmental causes of low IQ? We
already know that viral infection interferes with brain development
during the critical first trimester, sometimes in extreme ways. Viral
infection is also more prevalent in impoverished communities and is less
likely to be treated. It seems to me that this could be a very
important area of research, but the Republicans cannot even see the way
clear to fund CHIP and they are determined to kill any form of universal
health care.
Investigate. If you find something important, I think that would be
great, but after 8 years of Obama, you are back to blaming Republicans
again? Oh my.
It's always safe to blame Republicans, because they never
have the best interests of the common people at heart.
Wrong. Restricting immigration and bringing manufacturing back to the
US is central to the best interests of the common people -- and
opposed by Democrats.
I'm certainly in favour of restricting immigration, and I
doubt many democratic people are enthusiastic about more
immigration. Maybe Democratic politicians are, because like
Republican politicians they're being paid off by Big Money,
and Big Money likes cheap labour.
Don't be naive. Haven't you been watching the news? As we discuss
this, Trump is putting the arm on Democrat politicians, using the
threat of ending DACA to force Democrats to vote for border
enforcement. I hope he succeeds. And, by the way, Haiti is a Shithole.

Here is what a tried and true liberal rag, The New Republic, has to
say about Trump efforts to control the border ...

"Despite the fact that he has been unable to secure funding for his
notorious wall on the Mexican border, Trump has taken full advantage
of the various tools at his disposal to persecute the undocumented
community in the United States. Through an executive order and
subsequent memo, Trump has made all undocumented immigrants a priority
for deportation, overturning Barack Obama’s policy of focusing on
those who have committed serious crimes and recent border-crossers.
Another part of the order, which is tied up in the courts, would strip
federal funding from sanctuary cities. Trump has also called for the
hiring of 15,000 more border patrol and immigration personnel, raising
fears that an already emboldened Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) is going to get more aggressive in its pursuit of undocumented
immigrants."
https://newrepublic.com/article/144378/democrats-gave-us-trumps-immigration-nightmare

And the LA Times ...
"When it comes to immigration, Democrats need to ask themselves some
hard questions. Can they acknowledge that the large number of
immigrants in the country illegally, many of whom are relatively
unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job and wage
prospects for voters who used to be part of their base? Can they be
pro-Muslim immigration without being blind to the fact that the very
few Muslim immigrants inclined to terror can undermine public
tolerance with just a few fatal attacks? Can they admit that one can
have concerns about either type of migrant without being prejudiced or
racist — that there might just be some rational reason for Americans
to be wary of a lax or overly trusting approach to immigration?"
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-olsen-democrat-immigration-strategy-20170316-story.html

BTW -- San Francisco is a notorious sanctuary city, and defender of
illegal immigration. Last I checked, there hasn't been a Republican
seen in San Francisco since I left, 40 years ago.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-14 17:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 00:57:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I'm certainly in favour of restricting immigration, and I
doubt many democratic people are enthusiastic about more
immigration. Maybe Democratic politicians are, because like
Republican politicians they're being paid off by Big Money,
and Big Money likes cheap labour.
Don't be naive. Haven't you been watching the news? As we discuss
this, Trump is putting the arm on Democrat politicians, using the
threat of ending DACA to force Democrats to vote for border
enforcement. I hope he succeeds. And, by the way, Haiti is a Shithole.
I have been watching the news, and what I said here when
Trump's tax bill was first being pushed is already becoming
conspicuous: more money for the rich, and threats of
incursion into Social Security and Medicare to make up some
of the difference, though even if those happen we're still
going to end up with a whopping increase to the national
debt.

I agree that Haiti is a shithole, though for several years
after the 2005 hurricane I was contributing to the
Society of Friends for aid to Haiti, until last year when I
replaced that with Doctors Without Borders.

Puerto Rico seems to be something of a shithole too,
though not as bad as much of the deep South in the
USA IMO.
Post by El Castor
Here is what a tried and true liberal rag, The New Republic, has to
say about Trump efforts to control the border ...
"Despite the fact that he has been unable to secure funding for his
notorious wall on the Mexican border, Trump has taken full advantage
of the various tools at his disposal to persecute the undocumented
community in the United States. Through an executive order and
subsequent memo, Trump has made all undocumented immigrants a priority
for deportation, overturning Barack Obama’s policy of focusing on
those who have committed serious crimes and recent border-crossers.
Another part of the order, which is tied up in the courts, would strip
federal funding from sanctuary cities. Trump has also called for the
hiring of 15,000 more border patrol and immigration personnel, raising
fears that an already emboldened Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) is going to get more aggressive in its pursuit of undocumented
immigrants."
I agree with much of that of course, I've said repeatedly that I
oppose condoning illegal immigration, and think that the USA
should take care what it's doing before it accepts immigrants.
Post by El Castor
https://newrepublic.com/article/144378/democrats-gave-us-trumps-immigration-nightmare
And the LA Times ...
"When it comes to immigration, Democrats need to ask themselves some
hard questions. Can they acknowledge that the large number of
immigrants in the country illegally, many of whom are relatively
unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job and wage
prospects for voters who used to be part of their base? Can they be
pro-Muslim immigration without being blind to the fact that the very
few Muslim immigrants inclined to terror can undermine public
tolerance with just a few fatal attacks? Can they admit that one can
have concerns about either type of migrant without being prejudiced or
racist — that there might just be some rational reason for Americans
to be wary of a lax or overly trusting approach to immigration?"
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-olsen-democrat-immigration-strategy-20170316-story.html
BTW -- San Francisco is a notorious sanctuary city, and defender of
illegal immigration. Last I checked, there hasn't been a Republican
seen in San Francisco since I left, 40 years ago.
I strongly oppose San Francisco, or anywhere else, becoming
a "sanctuary city". As to the loss of Republicans from San
Francisco though, the more that leave, the merrier IMV. The
reason San Francisco was such a relief when I came here was
the dearth of "conservatives". There are other things going on
besides "sanctuary city", and we're better off without
"conservatives" for all of those things.

If the whole species of conservatives were to disappear from
the Earth, I wouldn't miss them at all, though we could put you
in a nice zoo where you couldn't do any harm, and give you TV
and Internet and stuff to read, and maybe set aside some
special vacation retreats in pleasant locales, where you could
vacation with your own kind, fenced off to keep conservatives
from leaking out into the mainstream. There's no need to be
barbarous about stopping conservative influence from further
damaging the USA.
El Castor
2018-01-15 21:10:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 00:57:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I'm certainly in favour of restricting immigration, and I
doubt many democratic people are enthusiastic about more
immigration. Maybe Democratic politicians are, because like
Republican politicians they're being paid off by Big Money,
and Big Money likes cheap labour.
Don't be naive. Haven't you been watching the news? As we discuss
this, Trump is putting the arm on Democrat politicians, using the
threat of ending DACA to force Democrats to vote for border
enforcement. I hope he succeeds. And, by the way, Haiti is a Shithole.
I have been watching the news, and what I said here when
Trump's tax bill was first being pushed is already becoming
conspicuous: more money for the rich, and threats of
incursion into Social Security and Medicare to make up some
of the difference, though even if those happen we're still
going to end up with a whopping increase to the national
debt.
I agree that Haiti is a shithole, though for several years
after the 2005 hurricane I was contributing to the
Society of Friends for aid to Haiti, until last year when I
replaced that with Doctors Without Borders.
Puerto Rico seems to be something of a shithole too,
though not as bad as much of the deep South in the
USA IMO.
Post by El Castor
Here is what a tried and true liberal rag, The New Republic, has to
say about Trump efforts to control the border ...
"Despite the fact that he has been unable to secure funding for his
notorious wall on the Mexican border, Trump has taken full advantage
of the various tools at his disposal to persecute the undocumented
community in the United States. Through an executive order and
subsequent memo, Trump has made all undocumented immigrants a priority
for deportation, overturning Barack Obama’s policy of focusing on
those who have committed serious crimes and recent border-crossers.
Another part of the order, which is tied up in the courts, would strip
federal funding from sanctuary cities. Trump has also called for the
hiring of 15,000 more border patrol and immigration personnel, raising
fears that an already emboldened Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) is going to get more aggressive in its pursuit of undocumented
immigrants."
I agree with much of that of course, I've said repeatedly that I
oppose condoning illegal immigration, and think that the USA
should take care what it's doing before it accepts immigrants.
Post by El Castor
https://newrepublic.com/article/144378/democrats-gave-us-trumps-immigration-nightmare
And the LA Times ...
"When it comes to immigration, Democrats need to ask themselves some
hard questions. Can they acknowledge that the large number of
immigrants in the country illegally, many of whom are relatively
unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job and wage
prospects for voters who used to be part of their base? Can they be
pro-Muslim immigration without being blind to the fact that the very
few Muslim immigrants inclined to terror can undermine public
tolerance with just a few fatal attacks? Can they admit that one can
have concerns about either type of migrant without being prejudiced or
racist — that there might just be some rational reason for Americans
to be wary of a lax or overly trusting approach to immigration?"
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-olsen-democrat-immigration-strategy-20170316-story.html
BTW -- San Francisco is a notorious sanctuary city, and defender of
illegal immigration. Last I checked, there hasn't been a Republican
seen in San Francisco since I left, 40 years ago.
I strongly oppose San Francisco, or anywhere else, becoming
a "sanctuary city". As to the loss of Republicans from San
Francisco though, the more that leave, the merrier IMV. The
reason San Francisco was such a relief when I came here was
the dearth of "conservatives". There are other things going on
besides "sanctuary city", and we're better off without
"conservatives" for all of those things.
If the whole species of conservatives were to disappear from
the Earth, I wouldn't miss them at all, though we could put you
in a nice zoo where you couldn't do any harm, and give you TV
and Internet and stuff to read, and maybe set aside some
special vacation retreats in pleasant locales, where you could
vacation with your own kind, fenced off to keep conservatives
from leaking out into the mainstream. There's no need to be
barbarous about stopping conservative influence from further
damaging the USA.
Bottom line, Donald Trump is struggling to secure the border.
Democrats are doing the opposite. If you can live with that, so be it.

By the way, you Dems are currently threatening a government shutdown,
rather than make a deal with Trump on DACA in exchange for much
tighter border security.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-15 22:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 13:10:48 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Bottom line, Donald Trump is struggling to secure the border.
Democrats are doing the opposite. If you can live with that, so be it.
The "fence" is pitiful.
Post by El Castor
By the way, you Dems are currently threatening a government shutdown,
rather than make a deal with Trump on DACA in exchange for much
tighter border security.
I don't like being blackmailed into throwing money
away in order to get something else, and I'm not
keen on giving foreign kids the right to be in the USA
just because they were smuggled in illegally by their
parents long ago anyway.
islander
2018-01-15 22:44:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 00:57:17 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
I'm certainly in favour of restricting immigration, and I
doubt many democratic people are enthusiastic about more
immigration. Maybe Democratic politicians are, because like
Republican politicians they're being paid off by Big Money,
and Big Money likes cheap labour.
Don't be naive. Haven't you been watching the news? As we discuss
this, Trump is putting the arm on Democrat politicians, using the
threat of ending DACA to force Democrats to vote for border
enforcement. I hope he succeeds. And, by the way, Haiti is a Shithole.
I have been watching the news, and what I said here when
Trump's tax bill was first being pushed is already becoming
conspicuous: more money for the rich, and threats of
incursion into Social Security and Medicare to make up some
of the difference, though even if those happen we're still
going to end up with a whopping increase to the national
debt.
I agree that Haiti is a shithole, though for several years
after the 2005 hurricane I was contributing to the
Society of Friends for aid to Haiti, until last year when I
replaced that with Doctors Without Borders.
Puerto Rico seems to be something of a shithole too,
though not as bad as much of the deep South in the
USA IMO.
Post by El Castor
Here is what a tried and true liberal rag, The New Republic, has to
say about Trump efforts to control the border ...
"Despite the fact that he has been unable to secure funding for his
notorious wall on the Mexican border, Trump has taken full advantage
of the various tools at his disposal to persecute the undocumented
community in the United States. Through an executive order and
subsequent memo, Trump has made all undocumented immigrants a priority
for deportation, overturning Barack Obama’s policy of focusing on
those who have committed serious crimes and recent border-crossers.
Another part of the order, which is tied up in the courts, would strip
federal funding from sanctuary cities. Trump has also called for the
hiring of 15,000 more border patrol and immigration personnel, raising
fears that an already emboldened Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) is going to get more aggressive in its pursuit of undocumented
immigrants."
I agree with much of that of course, I've said repeatedly that I
oppose condoning illegal immigration, and think that the USA
should take care what it's doing before it accepts immigrants.
Post by El Castor
https://newrepublic.com/article/144378/democrats-gave-us-trumps-immigration-nightmare
And the LA Times ...
"When it comes to immigration, Democrats need to ask themselves some
hard questions. Can they acknowledge that the large number of
immigrants in the country illegally, many of whom are relatively
unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job and wage
prospects for voters who used to be part of their base? Can they be
pro-Muslim immigration without being blind to the fact that the very
few Muslim immigrants inclined to terror can undermine public
tolerance with just a few fatal attacks? Can they admit that one can
have concerns about either type of migrant without being prejudiced or
racist — that there might just be some rational reason for Americans
to be wary of a lax or overly trusting approach to immigration?"
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-olsen-democrat-immigration-strategy-20170316-story.html
BTW -- San Francisco is a notorious sanctuary city, and defender of
illegal immigration. Last I checked, there hasn't been a Republican
seen in San Francisco since I left, 40 years ago.
I strongly oppose San Francisco, or anywhere else, becoming
a "sanctuary city". As to the loss of Republicans from San
Francisco though, the more that leave, the merrier IMV. The
reason San Francisco was such a relief when I came here was
the dearth of "conservatives". There are other things going on
besides "sanctuary city", and we're better off without
"conservatives" for all of those things.
If the whole species of conservatives were to disappear from
the Earth, I wouldn't miss them at all, though we could put you
in a nice zoo where you couldn't do any harm, and give you TV
and Internet and stuff to read, and maybe set aside some
special vacation retreats in pleasant locales, where you could
vacation with your own kind, fenced off to keep conservatives
from leaking out into the mainstream. There's no need to be
barbarous about stopping conservative influence from further
damaging the USA.
Bottom line, Donald Trump is struggling to secure the border.
Democrats are doing the opposite. If you can live with that, so be it.
By the way, you Dems are currently threatening a government shutdown,
rather than make a deal with Trump on DACA in exchange for much
tighter border security.
There would not have been a problem with DACA if Trump had simple
allowed the policy to remain unchanged. This problem is entirely one of
Trump's manufacture.
islander
2018-01-11 16:06:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:01 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
[...]
The main cause of conflict throughout world history has been
the undisciplined craving for more by political leaders,
a selfishness gone wild, the same condition that afflicts
alcoholics and addicts.
The remedy for that does not seem to be a ban on flu shots.
Why do you leave us hanging like that? Tell what
the remedy IS!
Let me quote Rumplestiltskin on that ...
"The USA is already doing one right thing and one wrong thing
to get it's population down to better levels, IMV. The right thing is
a birthrate below replacement. The wrong thing is inadequately
controlled immigration and, even worse, "sanctuary", especially
sanctuary from religious nut nations, many of whom promptly
become terrorists who run around knifing people and blowing
them up. Even if they don't do it themselves, their kids are
likely to be religious nuts too, so they might do what their parents
didn't do." ... Rumplestiltskin
I would add that the rest of the civilized world (which is almost
entirely below replacement rate), should adopt that approach. Those
countries unable or unwilling to do so will always have the solution
recommended by a famous gentleman named Ebenezer ... “If they would
rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus
population.” No more ship loads of food to Africa.
Well, we disagree on that last bit. I thing that just out
of atheist charity we should try to help out Africa. Africa
does need to reduce its birthrate IMV, but the best way
to do that, it seems, is to promote education and
thereby encourage prosperity. In Yoorup in the early
Middle ages, there were similarities to where Africa is
now. You had to have a lot of kids because most of
them were going to die young, and you needed the rest
to keep the family social network going. Last year I
added "Doctors without Borders" to my list of charities,
and I'd felt guilty for a long time before that of not
doing it.
Yes, Doctors without Borders is a great organization and does a lot of
good work. We contribute to it as well.

A good friend of mine is a retired pediatrician who did an annual trip
to countries in South America.
d***@agent.com
2018-01-10 20:24:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
Please note -- the following countries ALL have fertility rates BELOW
THE REPLACEMENT RATE. You do know what that "BELOW THE REPLACEMENT
RATE" means, right? Go preach your bullshit in the Congo or Zambia.
They will probably have you for dinner, obviating the need for a
cliff.
119 Antigua and Barbuda 2.00
120 Iceland 2.00
121 Guyana 2.00
122 Colombia 2.00
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
Just a tip on Usenet etiquette. You would do well to limit your
quote to a few lines that deal with the subject at hand, and
let the readergo to the source to read more. This post is too long.
El Castor
2018-01-11 02:07:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by islander
[...]
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
If we stop making flu shots altogether, it would address the
carrying capacity/population issue by shortening life spans by
a few years. And since it would be an unselfish act, it would also
address the main cause of conflict in the world, the undisciplined
craving for more by political leaders everywhere, a selfishness gone
wild, the same condition that afflicts alcoholics and addicts.
The principle of unselfishness is mentioned in every sermon,
in every house of worship, every day that services are held,
but that obviously is not enough to reach all areas of society.
You again? Why don't you start with yourself. There must be a bridge
or cliff nearby.
Please note -- the following countries ALL have fertility rates BELOW
THE REPLACEMENT RATE. You do know what that "BELOW THE REPLACEMENT
RATE" means, right? Go preach your bullshit in the Congo or Zambia.
They will probably have you for dinner, obviating the need for a
cliff.
119 Antigua and Barbuda 2.00
120 Iceland 2.00
121 Guyana 2.00
122 Colombia 2.00
123 Greenland 1.99
124 Iran 1.97
125 Ireland 1.97
126 Jamaica 1.96
127 Korea, North 1.95
128 Bahamas, The 1.94
129 Bermuda (UK) 1.93
130 New Caledonia (France) 1.93
131 Suriname 1.93
132 Isle of Man (UK) 1.92
133 Qatar 1.90
134 Paraguay 1.90
135 Bhutan 1.90
136 Gibraltar (UK) 1.90
137 Azerbaijan 1.89
138 Nicaragua 1.89
139 Costa Rica 1.89
140 French Polynesia (France) 1.88
141 Sweden 1.88
142 United Kingdom 1.88
143 United States 1.87
144 El Salvador 1.87
145 Norway 1.85
146 Seychelles 1.85
147 Cayman Islands (UK) 1.85
148 Aruba (Netherlands) 1.83
149 Vietnam 1.81
150 Uruguay 1.80
151 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1.80
152 Chile 1.80
153 Netherlands 1.78
154 Brunei 1.78
155 Belgium 1.78
156 Australia 1.77
157 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.77
158 Georgia 1.76
159 Uzbekistan 1.76
160 Mauritius 1.75
161 Saint Lucia 1.75
162 Finland 1.75
163 Brazil 1.75
164 Bahrain 1.75
165 Anguilla (UK) 1.74
166 Wallis and Futuna (France) 1.73
167 Denmark 1.73
168 Maldives 1.73
169 Lebanon 1.72
170 Palau 1.71
171 Cuba 1.71
172 Trinidad and Tobago 1.71
173 Turks and Caicos Islands (UK) 1.70
174 Liechtenstein 1.69
175 Barbados 1.68
176 Jersey (UK) 1.66
177 Armenia 1.64
178 Luxembourg 1.62
179 Russia 1.61
180 Macedonia 1.60
181 Estonia 1.60
182 China, People's Republic of 1.60
183 Canada 1.60
184 Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha (UK) 1.59
185 Lithuania 1.59
186 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (France) 1.57
187 Moldova 1.57
188 Guernsey (UK) 1.56
189 Switzerland 1.56
190 Malta 1.55
191 Ukraine 1.54
192 Portugal 1.53
193 Monaco 1.53
194 Thailand 1.52
195 Albania 1.51
196 Latvia 1.51
197 Spain 1.50
198 San Marino 1.50
199 Belarus 1.48
200 Cyprus 1.47
201 Austria 1.47
202 Bulgaria 1.46
203 Czechia 1.45
204 Hungary 1.45
205 Germany 1.45
206 Italy 1.44
207 Serbia 1.44
208 Greece 1.43
209 Japan 1.41
210 Slovakia 1.41
211 Croatia 1.40
212 Andorra 1.40
213 Slovenia 1.36
214 Romania 1.35
215 Poland 1.35
216 Montserrat (UK) 1.33
217 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.30
218 British Virgin Islands (UK) 1.29
219 Korea, South 1.26
220 Puerto Rico (US) 1.22
221 Hong Kong (China) 1.19
222 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 1.13
223 Macau (China) 0.95
224 Singapore 0.83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
Just a tip on Usenet etiquette. You would do well to limit your
quote to a few lines that deal with the subject at hand, and
let the readergo to the source to read more. This post is too long.
The length of this post is just as long as it needs to be.
El Castor
2018-01-01 21:52:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.

"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/

Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
islander
2018-01-01 22:17:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.
"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/
Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
I'm not worried about Orcas. I'm more above sea level than you are. Of
course, the middle of the island is only about 10' above sea level, so
we could possibly have a problem making it to the ferry landing which is
on the other side of the island.

Otherwise, I know that you like Shaviv. You have cited him many times
in the past. Otherwise, I don't think that you understand the issue of
gamma rays. The magnetic field of the earth protects us from gamma rays
and the magnetic field of the sun protects the near solar planets from
gamma rays. Both are subject to periodic field inversions that
interrupt the protection. There appears to be little or no relationship
to global warming. In fact, there is an inverse correlation to what is
happening.
El Castor
2018-01-01 22:40:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.
"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/
Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
I'm not worried about Orcas. I'm more above sea level than you are. Of
course, the middle of the island is only about 10' above sea level, so
we could possibly have a problem making it to the ferry landing which is
on the other side of the island.
Otherwise, I know that you like Shaviv. You have cited him many times
in the past. Otherwise, I don't think that you understand the issue of
gamma rays. The magnetic field of the earth protects us from gamma rays
and the magnetic field of the sun protects the near solar planets from
gamma rays. Both are subject to periodic field inversions that
interrupt the protection. There appears to be little or no relationship
to global warming. In fact, there is an inverse correlation to what is
happening.
Gamma rays? We are talking about Cosmic Rays -- sub atomic particles,
often protons, traveling at near the speed of light.

Here is Shaviv's latest piece on the subject. He would disagree with
you.
http://www.sciencebits.com/CosmicRays_Climate_TheMissingLink
islander
2018-01-02 01:44:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.
"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/
Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
I'm not worried about Orcas. I'm more above sea level than you are. Of
course, the middle of the island is only about 10' above sea level, so
we could possibly have a problem making it to the ferry landing which is
on the other side of the island.
Otherwise, I know that you like Shaviv. You have cited him many times
in the past. Otherwise, I don't think that you understand the issue of
gamma rays. The magnetic field of the earth protects us from gamma rays
and the magnetic field of the sun protects the near solar planets from
gamma rays. Both are subject to periodic field inversions that
interrupt the protection. There appears to be little or no relationship
to global warming. In fact, there is an inverse correlation to what is
happening.
Gamma rays? We are talking about Cosmic Rays -- sub atomic particles,
often protons, traveling at near the speed of light.
Here is Shaviv's latest piece on the subject. He would disagree with
you.
http://www.sciencebits.com/CosmicRays_Climate_TheMissingLink
My mistake. I meant to say cosmic rays which are deflected by magnetic
fields. Gamma rays are not.

Otherwise, cosmic rays have been pretty much discounted as a significant
factor in warming (or cooling). This from a skepticalscience.com post
of 26 Dec. 2017 in response to Shaviv's paper: "...cosmic rays have
been at record levels over approximately the last decade, and so should
have been causing a cooling effect. Instead warming has been especially
strong, so if cosmic rays have an effect it looks very weak."
El Castor
2018-01-02 06:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.
"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/
Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
I'm not worried about Orcas. I'm more above sea level than you are. Of
course, the middle of the island is only about 10' above sea level, so
we could possibly have a problem making it to the ferry landing which is
on the other side of the island.
Otherwise, I know that you like Shaviv. You have cited him many times
in the past. Otherwise, I don't think that you understand the issue of
gamma rays. The magnetic field of the earth protects us from gamma rays
and the magnetic field of the sun protects the near solar planets from
gamma rays. Both are subject to periodic field inversions that
interrupt the protection. There appears to be little or no relationship
to global warming. In fact, there is an inverse correlation to what is
happening.
Gamma rays? We are talking about Cosmic Rays -- sub atomic particles,
often protons, traveling at near the speed of light.
Here is Shaviv's latest piece on the subject. He would disagree with
you.
http://www.sciencebits.com/CosmicRays_Climate_TheMissingLink
My mistake. I meant to say cosmic rays which are deflected by magnetic
fields. Gamma rays are not.
Otherwise, cosmic rays have been pretty much discounted as a significant
factor in warming (or cooling). This from a skepticalscience.com post
of 26 Dec. 2017 in response to Shaviv's paper: "...cosmic rays have
been at record levels over approximately the last decade, and so should
have been causing a cooling effect. Instead warming has been especially
strong, so if cosmic rays have an effect it looks very weak."
I doubt this argument will ever end -- unless we find our posteriors
frozen off, and even then .... But wait ... could be a possibility.

From last week, more for John Cook to debunk --
"7 New (2017) Papers Forecast Global Cooling, Another Little Ice Age
Will Begin Soon"
http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/28/7-new-2017-papers-forecast-global-cooling-another-little-ice-age-will-begin-soon/#sthash.6QMasg90.dpbs

And ...

"Record-breaking big freeze grips much of North America
Severe cold hits vast area from south Texas to Canada, and Montana to
Maine
Omaha cancels New Year’s fireworks as temperature hits record low of
-15F"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/01/record-breaking-big-freeze-grips-north-america

"2018 starts with record cold in the Midwest
Bone-chilling cold gripped the middle of the U.S. as 2018 began,
breaking low temperature records."
http://www.kcci.com/article/2018-starts-with-record-cold-in-the-midwest/14526276

"Record lows recorded in Ontario, Alberta on New Year's Eve
It was dangerously cold in northern Quebec, where thermometers plunged
to –48.2 C"
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-year-s-eve-record-low-temperatures-1.4469466


Oh My God --- Wait!!! Here's a picture of your foremost authority --
your debunker of Skeptics -- John Cook!!
Loading Image...
OK, I'm impressed. )-8
islander
2018-01-03 16:49:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 02:29:18 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
Ooh, I hope I'm still around to hear what you'll say about
the fires and hurricanes next summer!
The case is stronger for extreme weather events. I'm not saying that
fires are not made worse because of global warming - it is just more
difficult to prove causality.
Fair enough. And, I'm not saying that record cold in the Mid-West and
East disproves global warming theories (anthropogenic or otherwise),
but it doesn't help the case. I am certain, however, that if the Earth
were to be suddenly plunged into a new ice age, some would insist the
ice was caused by global warming. (-8
It is really pretty simple. If you pump more energy into a system, the
variability of the response of that system increases.
It is equally simple to predict that hotter, colder, wetter, drier,
the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will attribute any
change in climate to global warming.
Here is an interesting graph -- something which you have probably
seen, but just in case, here it is again.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Yes, I have seen it and the cycles are partially explained by things
that you have posted earlier. What is unknown is how climate moved so
rapidly from cold to hot at the beginning of each interglacial periods
and what produced the recovery and plunge back into another glacial
period. There are some factors that are periodic, but they seem to be
small. If there were no anthropogenic change or other change to the
atmosphere, one might reasonably expect a repeat. But, the Holocene did
not reach the temperatures of the previous interglacial periods and it
has lasted much longer. There was the little ice age in the middle ages
which might have developed into a full blown glacial period consistent
with the periodicity of the graph that you showed, but it didn't. Why?
It is speculated that it may have been a consequence of plate drift that
caused a change in ocean currents, but that is only a hypothesis. There
was also a medieval warm period that might have developed into the
global temperature peak of the earlier interglacial periods. It didn't
reach those temperatures. Why? We don't really know.
The bottom line is that we should be thankful that the Holocene occurred
and has persisted for so long. Intentionally pumping CO2 that has been
sequestered for hundreds of millions of years and thereby forcing a
global temperature rise is reckless IMV. All evidence suggests that it
will cause a wide variety of social and economic problems, evidence of
which is already pretty obvious. Just not a good idea to fool with the
only planet that we have.
If that CO2 is staving off another ice age, perhaps it is not such a
bad thing. In any event, here is something just published that might
shed some light on a plausible reason for past climate fluctuations.
Cosmic rays again --- either in increased density in the spiral arms
of the galaxy, or produced in much greater concentrations by a nearby
supernova.
"Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud
condensation nuclei"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2#Sec2
Svensmark's hypotheses is that increased cosmic ray activity produces
clouds that shield the earth from the sun, thereby producing cooling.
In a 2009 paper he claimed that cosmic rays had ended the current
warming trend and were going to plunge us into another ice age.
Increased ionization should produce cooling, not warming. Never mind
the spiral arms of the galaxy or a nearby supernova, the sun production
of cosmic rays has been increasing over the past several decades which
would have a cooling effect. Warming has increased however.
But, if your favorite hypothesis is cosmic rays, there is this thing
called a Laschamp event where the earth's magnetic field reverses
leaving us vulnerable to cosmic rays. The last one occurred 41,000
years ago. What was going on climate-wise at the time? We were deep
into the last glacial period. We have a long historical record of
magnetic field reversals in the magnetic properties of volcanic rocks
and there does not appear to be any correlation with warming cycles.
The Sun also has a strong magnetic field that protects the inner solar
system from cosmic rays and there is some evidence that we will see a
flip of that magnetic field soon - perhaps only months away. This will
pose a threat to astronauts and space probes, but that is probably all
that will happen.
Cosmic rays discussed in the Svensmark/Shaviv/Enghoff paper are high
energy particles originating outside the solar system -- not from the
Sun. Many do escape the Sun's and the Earth's magnetic fields,
striking atoms in the earth's atmosphere, producing a shower of lower
energy particles, thus producing the cloud effect.
"The study of data collected by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
has revealed that cosmic rays, some of the fastest traveling particles
in the universe, are produced by supernovae. A separate study by the
European Southern Observatory (ESO) has made similar findings, largely
corroborating the Fermi results."
https://newatlas.com/nasa-cosmic-rays/26333/
Nir Shaviv, my favorite scientist on the subject, and a co-author of
the cosmic ray piece, does not deny the effect of CO2, but does
believe it is exaggerated, and far from being the only component of
climate change. At any rate, you had better move to Portland before
Orcas is submerged!
I'm not worried about Orcas. I'm more above sea level than you are. Of
course, the middle of the island is only about 10' above sea level, so
we could possibly have a problem making it to the ferry landing which is
on the other side of the island.
Otherwise, I know that you like Shaviv. You have cited him many times
in the past. Otherwise, I don't think that you understand the issue of
gamma rays. The magnetic field of the earth protects us from gamma rays
and the magnetic field of the sun protects the near solar planets from
gamma rays. Both are subject to periodic field inversions that
interrupt the protection. There appears to be little or no relationship
to global warming. In fact, there is an inverse correlation to what is
happening.
Gamma rays? We are talking about Cosmic Rays -- sub atomic particles,
often protons, traveling at near the speed of light.
Here is Shaviv's latest piece on the subject. He would disagree with
you.
http://www.sciencebits.com/CosmicRays_Climate_TheMissingLink
My mistake. I meant to say cosmic rays which are deflected by magnetic
fields. Gamma rays are not.
Otherwise, cosmic rays have been pretty much discounted as a significant
factor in warming (or cooling). This from a skepticalscience.com post
of 26 Dec. 2017 in response to Shaviv's paper: "...cosmic rays have
been at record levels over approximately the last decade, and so should
have been causing a cooling effect. Instead warming has been especially
strong, so if cosmic rays have an effect it looks very weak."
I doubt this argument will ever end -- unless we find our posteriors
frozen off, and even then .... But wait ... could be a possibility.
From last week, more for John Cook to debunk --
"7 New (2017) Papers Forecast Global Cooling, Another Little Ice Age
Will Begin Soon"
http://notrickszone.com/2017/12/28/7-new-2017-papers-forecast-global-cooling-another-little-ice-age-will-begin-soon/#sthash.6QMasg90.dpbs
And ...
"Record-breaking big freeze grips much of North America
Severe cold hits vast area from south Texas to Canada, and Montana to
Maine
Omaha cancels New Year’s fireworks as temperature hits record low of
-15F"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/01/record-breaking-big-freeze-grips-north-america
"2018 starts with record cold in the Midwest
Bone-chilling cold gripped the middle of the U.S. as 2018 began,
breaking low temperature records."
http://www.kcci.com/article/2018-starts-with-record-cold-in-the-midwest/14526276
"Record lows recorded in Ontario, Alberta on New Year's Eve
It was dangerously cold in northern Quebec, where thermometers plunged
to –48.2 C"
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-year-s-eve-record-low-temperatures-1.4469466
Oh My God --- Wait!!! Here's a picture of your foremost authority --
your debunker of Skeptics -- John Cook!!
https://lh5.ggpht.com/_gmR8fkmAnjw/S6mEPUJG0xI/AAAAAAAAAw4/mGNeSNCJQ1Q/JohnCookSkep190.jpg
OK, I'm impressed. )-8
Getting desperate? Are you complaining about how he looks?

I was surprised to learn that the skepticalscience.com project is now
part of the George Mason University Center for Climate Change
Communication. John Cook received his PhD and joined their faculty year
ago. I'm wondering how that sits with the Koch brothers who have been
major donors to George Mason, even establishing the Mercatus Center with
a $48M donation. As you probably already know, the Koch brothers are
strongly opposed to research on climate change and have used the George
Mason to publish reports favorable to their extreme libertarian beliefs.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/davidhalperin/george-mason-students-sue_b_14660680.html

I've got to be impressed with John Cook for going into that den of
snakes to pursue his career.
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-03 17:03:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Global warming will return next summer.

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2017-12-30 15:57:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
It is not a binary choice. Personally, I prefer that we try to keep the
climate of the Holocene which is the fundamental enabling factor in
creating civilization. Frittering away that possibility for short term
gain is foolish.

As to my carbon footprint, it is larger than I would like to admit.
Still, I designed this house with a large southern roof that could be
used for solar panels. I'm too old now to undertake that project.
Sadly, the day is approaching when we will need to move to the mainland
as a practical matter. CCRCs are tempting.
http://www.retirement.org/mirabellaseattle/ Not far from the major
hospitals and easy access to downtown. Could I become a city person?
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
I never said that the California fires were a consequence of climate
change, but it may have been a contributing factor. I tend to agree
with you that it was probably a factor of too many people living in
areas that were made more dangerous by their presence.

As to the Oakland fire, I was driving north on 101 toward SF with the
top down on my TR-6 when I found myself being showered with glowing ash
from the fire. I forgot about the errand that I was on and beat it back
home where my wife and I watched it on TV. A horror that was made worse
by negligent homeowners neglecting to trim back vegetation.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-12-30 19:53:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
It is not a binary choice. Personally, I prefer that we try to keep the
climate of the Holocene which is the fundamental enabling factor in
creating civilization. Frittering away that possibility for short term
gain is foolish.
As to my carbon footprint, it is larger than I would like to admit.
Still, I designed this house with a large southern roof that could be
used for solar panels. I'm too old now to undertake that project.
Sadly, the day is approaching when we will need to move to the mainland
as a practical matter. CCRCs are tempting.
http://www.retirement.org/mirabellaseattle/ Not far from the major
hospitals and easy access to downtown. Could I become a city person?
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
I never said that the California fires were a consequence of climate
change, but it may have been a contributing factor. I tend to agree
with you that it was probably a factor of too many people living in
areas that were made more dangerous by their presence.
As to the Oakland fire, I was driving north on 101 toward SF with the
top down on my TR-6 when I found myself being showered with glowing ash
from the fire. I forgot about the errand that I was on and beat it back
home where my wife and I watched it on TV. A horror that was made worse
by negligent homeowners neglecting to trim back vegetation.
I was at Fast Eddy's house when the Oakland Fire broke out.
He lived on Roosevelt Drive which has a panoramic view of
downtown and across the bay to Oakland. It was really
spectacular: a long line of whirling smoke across the hills,
with huge tongues of flame visibly leaping out at both ends.
islander
2017-12-31 00:29:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
It is not a binary choice. Personally, I prefer that we try to keep the
climate of the Holocene which is the fundamental enabling factor in
creating civilization. Frittering away that possibility for short term
gain is foolish.
As to my carbon footprint, it is larger than I would like to admit.
Still, I designed this house with a large southern roof that could be
used for solar panels. I'm too old now to undertake that project.
Sadly, the day is approaching when we will need to move to the mainland
as a practical matter. CCRCs are tempting.
http://www.retirement.org/mirabellaseattle/ Not far from the major
hospitals and easy access to downtown. Could I become a city person?
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
I never said that the California fires were a consequence of climate
change, but it may have been a contributing factor. I tend to agree
with you that it was probably a factor of too many people living in
areas that were made more dangerous by their presence.
As to the Oakland fire, I was driving north on 101 toward SF with the
top down on my TR-6 when I found myself being showered with glowing ash
from the fire. I forgot about the errand that I was on and beat it back
home where my wife and I watched it on TV. A horror that was made worse
by negligent homeowners neglecting to trim back vegetation.
I was at Fast Eddy's house when the Oakland Fire broke out.
He lived on Roosevelt Drive which has a panoramic view of
downtown and across the bay to Oakland. It was really
spectacular: a long line of whirling smoke across the hills,
with huge tongues of flame visibly leaping out at both ends.
Definitely not something that I would like to see repeated. Hopefully
Oakland implemented stronger regulations relating to fire danger.
El Castor
2017-12-31 08:09:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"Governor Brown criticizes President Trump for climate
change position as California burns
CBS News, 60 Minutes, Dec 08, 2017
California is reeling from its most destructive wildfire
season ever, exacerbated Governor Jerry Brown says, by the
effects of climate change. Brown says the fires show
President Trump is making a mistake by ignoring the facts of
global warming. Governor Brown speaks to Bill Whitaker for a
report to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Dec. 10, at
7:00 p.m., ET/PT.
Brown told Whitaker that President Trump is wrong to
withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement and
misguided for calling it a bad deal for America. "That's a
preposterous idea, not even a shred of truth in that
statement," Brown said. "I don't think President Trump has a
fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads
one to more humility... and this is such a reckless
disregard for the truth and for the existential consequences
that can be unleashed."
Brown has pushed California to take aggressive measures to
reduce its emissions. "We have a cap and trade system, which
is a very efficient way to reducing greenhouse gases. We
have zero-emission vehicle mandate. We have efficiency
standards for our buildings, for our appliances. California
is showing that dealing with climate is good for the
economy, not bad," says Brown.
In a wide-ranging conversation on the ranch that Brown's
great-grandfather settled in the 1860s, Brown told Whitaker
that California is a model for the rest of the country.
"It's a culture that's on the move -- not pulling up the
drawbridge out of fear and economic insecurity."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/governor-brown-criticizes-president-trump-for-climate-change-position-as-california-burns/
There's no stopping it. My time on Earth probably has
less than 10 years to go, so I'm just laying back and
watching the show. When the s. really hits the fan, I
won't be here.
A good friend of mine showed me a picture of his new grandson a few days
ago. I asked him how being a new grandfather affected his life. His
response was interesting. He said that he used to think in terms of a
20 year future (he is younger than me). Now, he said that he tends to
think in terms of a 100 year future since that is the amount of time
that his new grandson is likely to live. My grandsons are now about to
start college, so my time horizon is a bit shorter for personal reasons,
but I think that it is still a good idea to think about the long term.
We are each of us custodians of this spaceship for a limited period of
time, but we are just custodians. The notion to use up our resources is
like the religious belief that the earth and all the creatures are given
to us by God to use and there is no reason to think beyond the expected
return of Christ and the Rapture. The thinking that justifies use it
while we can is beyond my ability to comprehend.
What kind of fuel does your car use and how do you heat your house? I
still drive a hybrid. Gas heats the house. When better batteries are
perfected, if I am still around, I will no doubt go electric, but
global climate has always changed, and I am sure it will continue to
do so. Dinosaurs once roamed the North Slope of Alaska, and at one
time, and perhaps more than once, the Earth was a vast snow ball. If I
had to choose between warmer and another ice age (which would leave
you and yours under several thousand feet of glacier), I would go with
warmer.
It is not a binary choice. Personally, I prefer that we try to keep the
climate of the Holocene which is the fundamental enabling factor in
creating civilization. Frittering away that possibility for short term
gain is foolish.
As to my carbon footprint, it is larger than I would like to admit.
Still, I designed this house with a large southern roof that could be
used for solar panels. I'm too old now to undertake that project.
Sadly, the day is approaching when we will need to move to the mainland
as a practical matter. CCRCs are tempting.
http://www.retirement.org/mirabellaseattle/ Not far from the major
hospitals and easy access to downtown. Could I become a city person?
Sorry, I missed this part of your post. The wife and I have been to
Orcas several times, and were always fascinated by it. We have
relatives in the Seattle area as well as Portland, so retiring to
Orcas was a possibility we discussed, but the proximity to medical
care was always an issue. My wife has made four trips to the ER in the
last year, and more visits to this and that specialist than I could
count. Her health is much improved -- out of the woods, so to speak,
but we aren't getting any younger, so I know why you are considering a
move. Perhaps a nice condo in Seattle? Plenty of bandwidth, more
cultural amenities, nice restaurants, and very little maintenance. If
technology has pushed Seattle prices too high, Portland is nice, great
food, and it may be the most liberal city on the planet. (-8
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
BTW, there is no proof that global warming caused the California
fires. Development, and the electrical system that powers it, is
certainly suspect. We had a fire storm in the Oakland Hills in 1991.
There have never been suggestions that global warming caused that one.
I never said that the California fires were a consequence of climate
change, but it may have been a contributing factor. I tend to agree
with you that it was probably a factor of too many people living in
areas that were made more dangerous by their presence.
As to the Oakland fire, I was driving north on 101 toward SF with the
top down on my TR-6 when I found myself being showered with glowing ash
from the fire. I forgot about the errand that I was on and beat it back
home where my wife and I watched it on TV. A horror that was made worse
by negligent homeowners neglecting to trim back vegetation.
Loading...