Wednesday Highlights

Woo. Tomorrow US/Germany FIFA, eh?

  1. Getting close to Japanese bushido (goal in life is a good death) or Christian thoughts (that you will not perfect your life without (a) God’s intervention and (b) not in this life). Well, that’s how I saw that quote.
  2. Saurovka.
  3. Yet thousands and thousands of 500 foot tall windmills taking terawatts out of wind energy out of the atmosphere will have no climate effects.
  4. In part because the security industries continued existence depends on them actually not solving the problem.
  5. Back when fossil fuel burning industrialized Woolly Mammoth society endangered the planet.
  6. Fire them all.
  7. Resistance to antibiotics.
  8. A little cuteness.
  9. Except the man was stupid enough to not notice while finding his gate, boarding and talking to fellow passengers.
  10. Actually it’s not criminal. However a Volokh poster the other day did point out the actual consequences, which are interesting to consider (but I’m not finding the link). The upshot was that in a court of law if you fail to produce expected evidence like this with no excuse the ruling is that the expected evidence is held found to be against you. Which in this case means the IRS emails should be viewed in the absence of their production, as indicating both White House involvement and intentional political motivations. Glad they settled that so firmly, eh?
  11. One of the world’s demographic time bombs.
  12. Just one election.
  13. One of the two Benghazi scandals involving Ms Clinton. The other being her claim that she had no involvement in the security arrangements, which is either a lie or evidence of law breaking (by statute the Sec of State must sign off on all embassy security details).

10 Responses to Wednesday Highlights

  1. 3.Yet thousands and thousands of 500 foot tall windmills taking terawatts out of wind energy out of the atmosphere will have no climate effects.

    Probably not. Wind energy is essentially solar energy since the winds are powered by the sun. If you add up how much energy hits the surface of the earth in a day from the sun it’s huge making even all of our cumulative electric energy production a drop in the bucket so even if you took the thousands of windmills we already have and increase them by a factor of ten or even a hundred I doubt you could see any global climate impact

  2. #13 Only problem was there is no ‘video lie’.

    Even more ironic, the Benghazi ring leader who was recently nabbed by US Special Forces has himself said the video was indeed the motivating factor behind the attack, confirming what the NY Times found in it’s investigation.

    (by statute the Sec of State must sign off on all embassy security details)

    There was no embassy in Benghazi. The US embassy in Libya is in it’s capital, Tripoli.

  3. Boonton,
    I see. A fence can affect weather (which by your same argument doesn’t make a big cumulative energy impact) but windmills don’t.

    Try again. If a fence (or fences) can affect climate. So can windmills. Just ’cause you can’t predict the effect doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

  4. Tornados aren’t climate, they are actually very small and isolated weather events caused by air masses of different temps mixing together. The giant fences proposed would change the way that mixing happens to lower or eliminate tornados but I don’t see anything in the article that says it would actually change the climate of the midwest or the globe for that matter.

  5. Remember the difference between climate and weather. Weather is saying it will be 90 degrees in NYC tomorrow. Climate is saying NYC is hot in the summer and cold in the winter.

    The first requires maddingly complex simulations and measurement to just get to an approximately right answer. The second is relatively simple analysis of thermodynamics.

  6. Boonton,
    Ah, weather vs climate. You should pay attention to that. Weather is “will a tornado be likely in today’s storm system” … climate is saying tornadoes are likely in the spring in the Midwest and part of the Southwest (OK and parts of TX for example). Building walls as suggested change the climate, the tornado probability (climate) is altered. By suggestion is that windmills will also alter climate. I’m unclear on why you are resistant to that.

  7. Actually weather is more along the lines of “NYC will be 90 degrees at noon a week from now”, climate is “NYC is hotter in the summer, colder in the winter”.

    The first statement requires very complex models combined with accurate measurements and even then you’re likely to be wrong. The second statement is a relatively simple application of thermodynamics.

    Tornados are weather events, even if you’re making a generalist statement like ‘they are common in the midwest’. I’m willing ot grant you that some statements may blur the distinction between climate and weather. For example, saying “it is impossible for Saudi Arabia to experience a snow storm laying 6 inches or more of snow down” is probably a statement that could be safey made from just climate knowledge alone.

  8. Boonton,

    Tornados are weather events, even if you’re making a generalist statement like ‘they are common in the midwest’

    A tornado is a weather event. The frequency and number of tornadoes in a region over a season or year is climate.

  9. You’ve tried very hard and I’ll let you have that one. An exceptional amount of geoeningering (basically trying to make an aritficial mountain range 1000 ft high and over 1000 miles long may have a borderline impact on a region’s climate. By impact, you mean not the major climatic forces….temps, rainfall, etc. but the frequency of a dramatic weather event that is only known to happen in that one region of earth.

    Now that I’ve given you that what exactly have you demonstrated of value?

  10. Boonton,

    You’ve tried very hard and I’ll let you have that one. An exceptional amount of geoeningering (basically trying to make an artificial mountain range 1000 ft high and over 1000 miles long may have a borderline impact on a region’s climate.

    I don’t think that was the suggetion, I think he suggested a pattern of walls at a certain frequency would end the possibility of creating tornadoes in the Mid-West.

    Tornadoes happen not just in the midwest, btw. Large hurricanes spawn tornadoes. Waterspouts happen all over.

    Let’s see. Cities alter the climate around themselves for quite a distance. We know that. These walls might end tornadoes and they are man makeable. But apparently large numbers of windmills altering low altitude wind patterns over a continent will have no effect. Why do you think it will have no effect. I’m guessing that’s just wishful thinking because you have no reason to assume they won’t except that you hope they won’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>