I needed to turn on the latex plugin. I did so. It seems to work:
(And equation showed with WP LaTeX.)
$$e^{\i \pi} + 1 = 0$$
\(e^{\i \pi} + 1 = 0\)
That is almost all. I’m testing symbols, subscripts etc. This is fairly meaningless, though not entirely.
![\frac{dC}{dt} = \frac{1}{\tau_C} [ \ -C + \alpha_C T + \gamma_C S_{C}(t) + \mu_C ]](https://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-f475aebc552c751decb44d5300f4a4e3_l3.png "Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com")
![\frac{dT}{dt} = \frac{1}{\tau_T}[ \alpha_T C \ - T + \gamma_T S_{T}(t)+ \mu_T ]](https://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-a093fcd0386adcacc4ce05d84eaadfac_l3.png "Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com")
where 
is a source of 
about the reference level. It could include a random portion and a deterministic portion.
![E[x]](https://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-397696ada7e139309038cb9b2929e5c5_l3.png "Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com")
or 
stand for “Expected value of X”. (And I am not using the full subscript “C” for t I’m using “C” because three letters is just too many.)
I need to go back and see what I used to do to insert equation numbers and have things look prettier.
Openish thread: This is a continuation of the thread discussing DK’s signal processing. (I’ll close the other one.) Keep politics on the politics thread. Toy results are still a ways off. But I wanted to get this in here for now.
Below: Just latex questions.
Can I do this?
Mike M. (Comment #225875)
“One last point on the low diurnal variability of sea surface temperatures: Hurricanes do not go to sleep at night.”
– A very good point. I assume you mean the temperature of the waters it is traversing are staying high during the night and therefore may not show a diurnal drop at night.
My thoughts would be along the lines that they do have Hurricanes in the arctic where the sea is not warm and though the presence of hot sea water at the surface is both nurturing for the development and persistence of hurricanes it is more likely the difference in heat between the waters the hurricane is travelling over and the surrounding cooler waters.
I would expect temperature drops when the sun goes down. Hot water is not the cause of hurricanes which originate in the winds and water moisture in the atmosphere coming off Africa and travelling across the Atlantic
Mike M,
No, still relevant to any discussion of partitioning between sea and air. As to why the ice age atmospheric CO2 was lower than the K values suggest: Perhaps the lower temperatures led to less release of methane to the atmosphere from decomposition of plant matter.
angech (Comment #225898): “they do have Hurricanes in the arctic”.
.
No hurricanes in the arctic. A tropical cyclone is not the only way to generate hurricane force winds. One way is when a very strong surface temperature gradient forms; that is the driving force for nor’easters in the North Atlantic. But those are not hurricanes. The formation mechanism is different, the storm structure (the defining characteristic of a tropical cyclone) is very different, and they are not self-sustaining. Once the stored energy is released, the storm dies out in just a few days. A tropical cyclone can persist indefinitely as long as it remains over sufficiently warm water.
.
p.s. – It is actually not the water temperature per se that matters; it is the difference between surface T and mid-troposphere T. The latter is more uniform at any given time of year (determined by the climate) so it is sea surface T that ends up being used as a predictor.
SteveF (Comment #225899): “As to why the ice age atmospheric CO2 was lower than the K values suggest: Perhaps the lower temperatures led to less release of methane to the atmosphere from decomposition of plant matter.”
.
I think that stored methane is pretty small compared to CO2. And we have methane concentrations from ice cores. Stored biomass was lower during ice ages, so that is not it. From what I have read, it seems pretty certain that the missing CO2 was in the deep ocean; there is no other place for it. I am pretty sure there is evidence of that from ocean sediment cores, so the conclusion does not just depend on eliminating other possibilities. If memory serves, only a modest decrease in the overturning circulation could explain the change in partitioning. So far as I know it is not known why the circulation was weaker.
Mike M,
This paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14383/
suggests the last glacial maximum level of methane was much lower than can be easily explained with current earth system models. They note:
The linked article below has a plot of past glacier periods with temperature differences and atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Looking at peak to peak temperature and CO2, an estimate of 16 ppm per degree K looks reasonable.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-the-rise-and-fall-of-co2-levels-influenced-the-ice-ages/
The linked article below has a plot of past glacier periods with temperature differences and atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Looking at peak to peak temperature and CO2, an estimate of 16 ppm per degree K looks reasonable.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-the-rise-and-fall-of-co2-levels-influenced-the-ice-ages/
If you look at the Navier-Stokes equations you will find that temperature only enters in the forcing terms as the gradient aside from the equation of -struck- .
In a warming world equator to pole gradients will decrease. I would expect mid-latitude weather to get less sever. It also appears that the vertical temperature gradients are not increasing either and this is what drives tropical cyclones.
It seems that Demetris and Lucia are actually able to converse easily in that strange language including Monte Carlo and a rather advanced filtered-Hurst-Kolmogorov process.
–
I am impressed and hope it leads to clarification.
–
A question on my mind is does it matter where the C (for CO2) you use comes from?
I presume it refers only to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere alone regardless of source or sink.
So changes in it from extraneous sources, respiration fossil fuels and volcanoes or methane breakdown will not actually be determinable other than if a CO2 signal rise to following temperature rise is identified?
Even then the putative cause of the rise will be arguable by some as to how it is spread.
Whereas if temperature is the driver through whatever postulated mechanism the chance of CO2 driven changes occurring as a cause is severely diminished if not destroyed?
angech
Matter to what? It’s radiative properties are not affected by “where it comes from”. But the amount of thermal forcing for the earth’s atmosphere is affected by the concentration.
This the MathJax plugin? that’s fairly reliable with a few wrinkles
If you already know this stuff, nevermind
use \dfrac{}{} instead of \frac{}{} for a better display. Sequential numbering is discussed here
https://docs.mathjax.org/en/latest/input/tex/eqnumbers.html
but you should be able to use the inline \( \) and block \[ \[ delimiters. The block ones should autonumber, but you can use \notag and \nonumber to supress line numbers.
also if you are running into “issues” https://editor.codecogs.com/
is a useful LaTex editor.
Also look into Mathpix.com to convert printed eqs to LaTex
So Eli, being Eli, went poking about and tossed up this comment on Koutsoyiannis et al. by Leif Åsbrink in the january 11 2023 issue of PRSA. It says pretty much what everybunny has been saying
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2022.0529
This comment is notable for two things, all the references are to websites (inc. Roy Spencer’s blog) and there is no reply by Koutsoyiannis. Also, can’t recall the reply being discussed very much if at all.
Eli
It’s WP LaTeX by https://automattic.com/.
I don’t remember why I picked it. But I did…. Long ago. I had it turned off and now it’s back on. Since it’s working, that’s that! 🙂
Eli,
I don’t disagree with that reasoning. The lines of evidence etc are more robust.
.
I think on the previous thread I said that when presented with
(A) some rather robust evidence, that simple to explain (and as SteveF and other have said do things like rely on “mass balance” and “conservation of energy” etc.) vs.
(B) a Blizzard of math spread over a bunch of papers
.
And the two come out with opposite answers, you should stick with the answer to (A) until people have had time to go through a blizzard of math.
.
That said: the DK paper is a blizzard of math that seems to show …. something. I’m pretty sure I can show what’s either wrong or “deeply misleading” with the statistical model as a model. It’s just going to be a bit slow because I have to create the “right sort” of toy model and run the “right sort” of simulations.
.
I haven’t done them yet– but I’m putting together the “toys” right now. Those create the data (aka “meat”). I have the R package that will let me make the “meat grinder”. In a month or two I think I’ll be able to show the “sausage”.
.
Of course the “toy” models are not the simulations DK ran, and so not the ones the reviewers suggested. You don’t need to redo what DK did to test the method– those are the cases the meat grinder doesn’t choke on. It needs to be tested with features he did not include. (Notice he doesn’t believe in “Trends”. It’s a word with him. I’ll elaborate on that and explain “the problem”.)
And of course, you may have noticed he offerred to run the models I suggest himself. But I think it’s better if I write them and explain them in my way because I think I will be able to have cases that show what’s wrong. And even if it’s slow, sometimes it’s easier to just do the cases you think need to be done rather than try to explain what you want in the thing (especially to someone who seems to not believe there can be determinism mixed in with stochastic stuff. Or something…. You make whatever you can out of my discussion with him about “trends”.)
.
Anyway, sometimes “novel statistical techniques” have… ehrmmmm… problems. And because they are novel, the people looking at them don’t quite get what can go wrong with, when and so on.
.
Even though I don’t think I need to show this for you to disbelieve DK’s result, I think there are people who will need to see that this “signal processing” as “signal processing” likely doesn’t do what it claims to do. So…. I think it’s sort of worth my time (even though I’m supposed to be sewing a costume for a dance showcase.)
Eli–
And…. my toy will replicate that issue of T “causing” C, while, overall the human emissions cause C. The issue is how to present cases that will crush the “meat grinder” of DK’s statistical signal processing, to show it does and explain what goes wrong in that process.
Good to also see Eli offering some help.
There are a lot of bright bunnies out there but hard to get them on the same page normally.
Which goes to show how important this issue is.
Eli would not be offering help unless he felt the out come was a no brainer but what the heck , he also has shown some mathematical chops.
–
If the CO2 comes from “somewhere” is important in the sense that the amounts present has two current putative sources that are irreconcilable, one from predictable outgassing, the other by random addition.
While this will not affect its radiative properties it would muddy up the case for attribution
angech,
Oh…. I think Eli would help me find things like Latex either way. 😉
.
I agree with the Eli Rabett link to the Royal Society.
The link notes different processes on different time scales that are not related. Demetris Koutsoyiannis (DK) appears to ignore this. The HOE paper could well have the high frequency time scale correct as what it found on that scale is not new. Perhaps the approach to cause and effect has a novel basis for justification of publication.
The incorrect extrapolation that DK makes shows his lack of familiarity with other aspects of climate science which in some ways reminds me of journalists making more of the contents of climate science papers than the papers should allow. I also think that DK’s interest in Long Term Persistence might well have gotten in the way of better judgment in this matter.
Great Arctic Cyclone of 2012 – Wikipedia “Great Arctic Cyclone of 2012,” was a powerful extratropical cyclone that was centered on the Arctic Ocean in early August 2012.
It is funny but if you type in Arctic hurricanes there seem to be a lot of hits including this one calling them a cyclone instead.
Mechanisms size strength and duration may be different or smaller but they all have destructive winds and a central eye.
I guess hot water is not the be all of hurricane formation after all.
angech,
The meteorological term “hurricane” refers to a type of tropical cyclone.
Not all cyclones are tropical cyclones.
Not all storms with hurricane force winds are tropical cyclones.
In everyday language, “hurricane” is sometimes used to refer to any powerful storm. The term can even be used to refer to things that have nothing to do with weather.
Extratropical cyclones sometimes have an eye-like feature, but so far as know they never have a true eye.
Question for people who are up to date on the CMIP6 models. Do these model feedback from the ocean’s possibly releasing or absorbing CO2 due to changes in the earth’s atmosphere? (This will be relevant to interpreting results DK got throwing CMIP6 data into his “meat grinder” of a data analysis program.)
.
I know older models did not attempt to account for this sort of possible feedback. But I don’t know if newer models try to do this. (He throws the “model mean” of CMIP6 models into the “meat grinder”.)
Lucia,
Sorry, no idea. But doubt it, since that kind of feedback is discounted by the “leaders in the field”.
SteveF,
I think if it’s neglected it’s more likely to have been done because it’s difficult and even more computationally intensive than just the atmosphere. I think to do it you: You probably MUST
* do ocean circulation and get it fairly right. (So you know where upwelling downwelling is happening, Yada, yada.)
* Gets local chemsitry kinetics (?) at the surface right.
*Carry CO2 along in your transport equations both in the atmosphere and the ocean.
Sure maybe you can wing some of this, but I think if you approximate to much it’s no longer a “circulation model”.
All of that would be a pretty big computational leap. It doesn’t mean it can’t be done or that it hasn’t. Just don’t know.
.
I’ve got that on my “things to find out list”. But…. well… people like Gavin know. And “any bunny” might happen to know. It’s going to be discussed in the IPCC documents. I’m just creating Tempearture and CO2 time series right now and picking some parameters.
.
(It’s not supposed to BE earth. But it would be nice if some of the numbers were in the ball park– about 0.1K/decad to 0.2 K/decade in past historical record. About right C02 rise. About right emmissions. Pretty big windows are ok, because I want to show things people can “see”. And I’m sure there are some ranges of numbers that would make DK’s method break. but it’s not fair if they really are absolutely outlandish for earth.
lucia,
I think the question would be whether the models specify CO2 concentrations or CO2 emissions. I think it is usually the former, in which case there is no need to worry about T affecting CO2 partitioning. As you say, the latter is a lot harder, but would be required if specifying emissions.
.
There are models that simulate CO2 uptake, but I don’t know if they are incorporated into GCMs. I would think that they would have better uses for the computing power.
MikeM,
Yes, I think you are correct. If they specify concentrations rather than emissions, that implies they are not trying to determine concentrations from the model. I think that’s the answer.
And I think they specify concentrations.
.
I’ll double check. But it’s an issue for a particular question that could present itself vis-a-vis commenting on DK.
Skeptical science 2015
“As discussed in the first paragraph of this post (and evident in Figure 1), the natural flux of CO2 in and out of natural systems varies from year-to-year. This flux is 20-30 times larger than the annual contribution by humans, but this balances out in the long-term.
–
If the curve fits
Seasoned readers will notice similarities between this Salby claim temp /CO2 fit back to 1960) and a Lon Hocker rebuttal here at SkS last year. But the whole premise seems to follow along the lines of other recent flawed works tendered by Roy Spencer and Craig Loehle & Nicola Scafetta.”
–
Figures for natural emissions estimates per year are hard to find. Hence the quotes.
In a good growth year the drawdowns and increases in emissions over a year dwarve the human emissions and are very hard to estimate so agree with those who go with concentrations.
–
I find myself in terrible territory but note that these views are out there and need full scientific rebuttals by the people here who may have carbon lens. When the only argument put foreword is dismissal immediately rather than reasoned argument life gets very interesting.
We have had years with 100Gt CO2 excess in production with forest fires and absorption with growth with no, repeat no change in the CO2 levels.
Why?
angech,
I don’t think the forest fires are “excess” CO2. The reason is there was never an era where forest fires did not occur. That’s something that always happened– before industrialization after and so on.
Jim2 at Climate etc actually provided a good point and example to show how atmospheric CO2 actually depends on the ocean no the air.
Both in coke cans and oceans the CO2 in a bubble of air that forms must have oxygen, nitrogen (to give one the bends) and CO2.
But this bubble will have the amount of CO2 in at at a depth of 10 atmospheres that will give 421 ppm of CO2 when it expands, reaches the surface and out gases at 1 atmosphere and 14.9C surface temp .
A myriad of decreasing concentrations as it rises.
Yet all perfectly in eventual balance with the surface when it pops and outgasses.
– What possible role gas any human minute fossil fuel use thousands of kilometers away got to do with how much CO2 is in that bubble.
None.
Yet like Feynman says it knows how to come out at exactly the right concentration for the atmosphere it is allowed to discharge into.
This is actually a very pertinent point for those who choose to dispute the influence of only (mainly) temperature and pressure on the CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
I hope it will change people’s minds if given due consideration.
–
Lucia sorry to post so much.
In reference to Forest Fires there is actually literature out there on how much extra CO2 is produced by a Forest Fire and some great examples of recent Mega burns visible from space including a major Indonesian one 12 years ago and more recent Canadian, Californian and Australian disasters.
While there are always fires and decomposition around the world it can take time to build up growth and an extra hot year to set them off so they are not necessarily balance in the one year at all.
I believe that if emissions are being monitored from space that these years would show large CO2 loads.
Others may argue that the burning reduces the amount of decomposition that would otherwise take place, a valid but not good enough point.
The USA land area is a significant net sink for CO2 according to this: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/sites/default/files/2022-04/hot-topic-carbon-status.pdf
.
The net uptake includes forests, grasslands, and “permanent” removal of cellulose via harvesting of trees for wood products, and is equal to ~ 15% of total US emissions from fossil fuels and cement production. All of which is consistent with the entirety of Earth’s land area acting as a net sink year on year. Hysterical claims about vast net emissions due to forest fires are just, well, hysterical claims.
angech,
It’s ok you post a lot. But you don’t seem to recognize that there isn’t really any debate that the earth does absorb some of the carbon emitted. No one one is going to tell you it doesn’t. No one is criticizing the paper for saying the earth absorbs carbon and not even that the absorption is temperature dependent!!
.
I don’t know why you are focusing some much attention on that issue.
What do you guys find easier to under stand for “Expected value”![E[x]](https://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-a5a8366cd0c57c8e5a051d3a69adc031_l3.png "Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com")
or
.
(1)
(2)
Latex seems to preserve the brackets inside the latex escape thingies.
And I think they way for you to enter latex is
Update: Latex doesn’t seem to work in comments.
Looks like I”m going to try another plugin… (I’d like equations in comments. Hopefully it will work. The format for equations is the same.)
https://wordpress.org/plugins/mathjax-latex/
angech,
Deforestation is certainly included in global carbon budgets.
I don’t credit your 100 Gt number without a source that says exactly what the number is.
lucia – Looking at the page source, your latex equations have been turned into image references, with the image URL containing the latex source.
I can presumably have an equation in the comments by doing the same, but it would be unwieldy (to put it kindly).
[Edit: can’t seem to use the same syntax of “<img src=…" in a comment. It just gets ignored.]
HaroldW,
Seems most HTML is ignored by wordpress comments. When I posted as an author here, I could put in anything I wanted.
SteveF (Comment #225941)
Hysterical claims about vast net emissions due to forest fires are just, well, hysterical claims.
Mike M. (Comment #225951)
I don’t credit your 100 Gt number without a source that says exactly what the number is.
I have overstated. Both right.
Understanding the Greenhouse Gas Impact of Deforestation Fires in Indonesia and Brazil in 2019 and 2020 the emissions from fires in Indonesia and Brazil 7 and 3% of total global GHG emissions in 2019 and 2020.Indonesia and Brazil collectively emitted nearly 2 Gt CO2eq 2019 and 1 Gt CO2eq2020 from the burning of above-ground biomass doubles the combined GHG impact to 3.65 GtCO2eq in 2019 and ~1.89 GtCO2eq in 2020.
Forest fires in Indonesia in 1997 0.81 and 2.57 gigatonnes of carbon (note not CO2)into the atmosphere, which is between 13 and 40% of the annual carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels.
CSIRO Publishinghttps://www.publish.csiro.au ZD Tan · 2020 · shows another temp to C02 causation Notable haze events in 1997–98 and 2015 coincided with El Niño
Harold
Yes. But it doesn’t seem to be happening in comments. I’m going to try another plugin. It might not work– but it’s worth a try. It would be nice for visitors to insert equations.
$$E=mc^2$$
\(E=mc^2\
No joy.
During the brief period when I had author privileges here, I was able to link images. But not in comments.
.
Lucia, don’t you suppose that the prossibly few commenters here who could contribute latex susceptible math should be given author rights or whatever lesser thing which would work?
.
I think we all know who they would be.
Even I can’t put latex in comments so giving auther priviliges won’t work. I’ll be trying a different plugin, but it may be that wordpress is just preventing insertion into comments generally.
I’ll solve that problem in a bit, but right now, I’m creating my “toy planet”. The testing requires:
(1) A “meat maker”. (That’s the toy planet.)
(2) A “meat grinder” That’s the code you throw the meat into. So it’s what implements DK’s method.
The output we get will be the “sausage”– well after we stuff it in some sort of casing I guess.
The equatoins are going to vanish and reappear, possibly a few times.
WP LaTeX is currently on. That’s the first one I used.
I’m going to try MathJax, but it doesn’t seem to be inserting the necessary Javascript code into the headers and doesn’t work. I’ll be trying again tomorrow. (Jim’s cooking dinner…. so I’m going to eat.)
Lucia.
First some encouragement.
These things (Latex) have to work.
–
Second on temperature causing CO2 rise is the admission by LeifÅsbrink2023https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2022.0529
–
“Koutsoyiannis et al. studied the causal relationship between atmospheric temperature (T) and the concentration of carbon dioxide ([CO2]) [1] with their proposed causality detection methodology [2].”
–
“[CO2] is in a dynamic equilibrium with the CO2 concentration in the sea. This equilibrium is shifted when the sea surface temperature is changed. Increasing T will cause increased [CO2]. Since CO2 is a greenhouse gas, increasing [CO2] will cause warming of the atmosphere. Perturbing one will thus affect the other. If there is a delay in this effect, one can conclude that the first variable is probably the cause and the delayed second variable is the response to the change in the first one.”
–
Comment #225586 said
“Nobody has claimed the CO2 in the atmosphere is in equilibrium with the ocean, just the opposite has been stated many times: the concentration in the atmosphere is higher than the concentration which would be in equilibrium with the ocean. Which is why there is net flux from the atmosphere into the ocean. Please point out where anybody but you suggested there is equilibrium.”
–
Thanks to Eli for this article which answers SteveF’s request from earlier.
–
causality could not be determined with CO2 and temp as they were two periodic processes.
Mike M. (Comment #225545)
I hope this puts that chicken to rest also.
–
Finally the nub of the argument, as clearly stated by a protagonist.
Comment #225544)
–
“ it seems to me to be a direction of causality issue. It is the detrending of the data that I think can’t be justified, because it masks the true source of causality (emissions) and exaggerates the importance of T–>CO2, with the (incorrect) implication that T is causal for the observed rise in atmospheric CO2.”
–
This latest paper raised the question of a causality which everyone has known is true for a long time.
Temperature rise leads to a natural CO2 rise at almost all time intervals where there are no other unusual factors.
The mechanism is known.
–
The argument that de trending the data should cause a problem is an interesting one that needs more justification.
I fail to see how it can possibly exaggerate the importance of temp.
Nor that it masks a true source of causality since it is not assigning a causality to CO2, methane, solare output, clouds , albedo etc, any or all of which could be considererei possible true sources.
–
The argument, once Lucia concurs with K, is not about temperature being a driver but to what extent and what are we basing that on.
–
CO2 levels being higher when temperatures are higher is a given.
I have no argument with that.
Does/has/can CO2 increase and persist in the atmosphere from fossil fuel sources as the only reason is the question.
It is not good enough to be simplistic and say that the amount of CO2 put into the air has to stay there because it is extra.
Just not good enough.
The dynamics and physics of why it is there in the first place, not fossil fuels, and why it stays there , not fossil fuels, and how it is ever variable at sea level in conjunction with the time of day or night due to temperature and equilibrium with its vast primal source, the sea has to give rise to thought.
Or not.
angech
This is not an “admission”!!!! At least not by normal definitions of “admission”. Something someone has said all along is not an “admission”.
.
You don’t seem to grasp that temperature causing CO2 to rise (due to solubility in the ocean) or fall( due to a possible effect on increasing the amount of carbon sucking stuff in the biospphere) is not controversial.
.
sigh….. You seem to take it as a forgone conclusion that I will “concur” with DK on some unspecified thing. I’m sure we can concur 2+2=4. But who knows? He might decree that is not a scientific question. (It’s not btw.)…..
I don’t know if I will “concur” or not. I suspect not– but I don’t know. I’ve said this is going to take a while because I needed to better read the arguments in the papers (which are spread over multiple documents), I need to put together a list of questions, I need to look at possible toy models. I will neither concur nor prove there are serious issues until at least January. Do not interpret the time lag as meaning anything other than that I have been refreshing my memory about “eigen values”, “impulse response functions” and trying to put together a toy to efficiently deal with the questionable things with the paper.
.
I an not wasting my time debatingw hat the answers are to those questions without doing background work. I’d trying to do the work.
.
Honestly, I guess reading upirfull comment, I don’t know what you are trying to say, what text you post related to quotes of things others said, and which bits are your position.
.
That said, I thin the main questions are:
(1) Does DK’s method really truly identify “cause” vs. “effect” in general? Or more specificlcally, under what circumstances can it do so and what circumstances will it fail?
(2) Has he shown it does ideitfies those cause and effect in the case studies (not his toy models)
(3) Given what he ultimately applies his method to, do his toys sufficiently test his statistical method?
(4) Can his method identify cause and effect in data generated by systems with features “similar” to what we believe applies to climate? and (finally)
(5) Has he made a persuasive case that C02 does not cause the secular trend in temperature which we have seen since the industrial revolution.
.
My current view is the “case studies” he did with “toy” (i.e. synthetic data were not adequate to show he would get the right answer with climate data. But this is an question that can only be answered using “monte carlo” on appropriate toy models. It can’t be answered by having debates about philosopy in comments..
.
angech (Comment #226088),
OK, so you found another paper by someone who doesn’t know what he is talking about. Big deal.
Fact: CO2 in the atmosphere is not in in equilibrium with the ocean.
Fact: The annual cycle in CO2 is due to the changing balance between photosynthesis and respiration.
Fact: The long term trend in CO2 is due to anthropogenic activity.
Fact: You can not determine causality between two periodic processes without some sort of physical model.
Lucia
“You seem to take it as a forgone conclusion that I will “concur” with DK on some unspecified thing.”
–
No.
The term “once” is very strong and it would have been much better for me to have said “if” or “in the rare chance that”.
You are interested in the mathematical concepts and the concepts of proving or disproving this man’s methods of analysis
Go for it.
I do not mind how long it takes if it is doable.
–
re ” (5) Has he made a persuasive case that C02 does not cause the secular trend in temperature which we have seen since the industrial revolution.”
–
Difficult to say.
A true increase in the amount of CO2 that can go into the atmosphere IMO would require a mechanism currently an unknown unknown.Say a Long term volcanic event of sufficient intensity and lifespan to put enough CO2 into the atmosphere to overwhelm the buffering and absorption effect of the oceans. Nothing like that known of for millennia but not impossible but very unlikely.
If the earth was to increase the substrate in this way, 100’s of gigatons a year for 1010 – 50 years. I would certainly expect a temperature rise from the CO2 increase in the atmosphere in those circumstances only it could lead the temperature.-
The big problem is if not the CO2 or temp [sun/albedo] what is causing an obvious CO2 and temp rise.
Hence (4) Can his method identify cause and effect in data generated by systems with features “similar” to what we believe applies to climate?
I think that his method allows wrong assumptions to be ruled out by showing that the seeming effect comes before the postulated cause.
But I do not know if ruling out or ruling in a cause /effect could ever prove an assumption correct as the seeming cause, say temperature here, might itself be secondary to some other cause.
In other words we can prove things wrong [only takes one fact or experiment to disprove an idea] but not the reverse.
Mike M. (Comment #226091
re angech (Comment #226088),
“OK, so you found another paper by someone who doesn’t know what he is talking about. Big deal.”
“Fact: CO2 in the atmosphere is not in in equilibrium with the ocean.”
–
Slow down and define what you mean so we are talking the same CO2 and the same equilibrium terms for starters, OK?
–
The quote on equilibrium is from a reference above by Eli Rabett, a very smooth talking an intelligent professor who believes strongly in global warming.
Eli’s source is someone who knows what he is talking about.
Revisiting causality using stochastics on atmospheric temperature and CO2 concentration Volume 479Issue 2269 Article Information
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2022.0529
Published by:Royal Society
“Ken Fritsch (Comment #225924) was happy with it and its conclusion that disagreed with K.
“I agree with the Eli Rabett link to the Royal Society.”
–
The wording in the article was “dynamic equilibrium” but equilibrium is an easily defined term. It means being in balance.
–
So.
Do you believe that CO2 goes into the atmosphere from the ocean?
Do you believe that CO2 goes into the ocean from the atmosphere?
Like all chemical processes it is dependent on temperature and pressure?
That when the amounts allowed are in balance that this is called an equilibrium.
That this equilibrium must be maintained, in other words at a liquid air surface the flow is always in the direction of an equilibrium and that for all intents and purposes this action is being satisfied at the surface layer at all times.
Mike M,
Unfortunately, many people simply have little capacity to understand physical processes, nor the basic constraints on those processes. I don’t waste time arguing with the ‘sky dragon slayers’ either. Life is too short.
angech
I think this is not difficult: He hasn’t made the case. I know he thinks he has, but he hasn’t. I’m not going to elaborate here in comments, because part of the delay is organizing things to explain why he hasn’t made the case. That requires time and trying to do it in a haphazard way only sucks up my time and means it will take longer for me to do it properly.
angech
Are those questions rhetorical? (Looks like yes. People here have answered them over and over.)
angech,
I am starting to think you don’t want to learn.
.
We can measure the composition of seawater including such things as temperature pH, dissolved CO2, bicarbonate, and carbonate. Since all of the relevant equilibrium constants are well known, we can calculate the partial pressure of CO2 that would be in equilibrium with the seawater. That varies from place to place, but overall is much less than the actual partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere. That is for the surface layer of the ocean, the partial pressure for deep waters is much greater than in the atmosphere.
.
angech: “at a liquid air surface the flow is always in the direction of an equilibrium”
.
You got that bit right. There is at present a constant flow of CO2 from the atmosphere to the ocean. Because they are not in equilibrium.
$$\int{\frac{1}{cabin}}=houseboat$$
What did people think of the economist, I think VS, post about econometrics and that temperature data had a unit root?
Mike M. (Comment #226098)
“I am starting to think you don’t want to learn.”
–
Happy to learn from you,
or any of the others here.
–
“We can measure the composition of seawater including such things as temperature pH, dissolved CO2, bicarbonate, and carbonate. Since all of the relevant equilibrium constants are well known, we can calculate the partial pressure of CO2 that would be in equilibrium with the seawater.”
–
Agree on that part.
–
“That varies from place to place, but overall is much less than the actual partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere.”
–
The logic here is not right, I think.
As you say
“That is for the surface layer of the ocean”
–
My reasoning goes like this.
The partial pressure of CO2 we use is a global average like global average surface temperature though we only refer one reference point in normal usage.
Would you be happy if I use 420 ppm for it for this year for the argument? Thanks.
Now the fact that it may vary from place to place with temperature( night and day) does not and cannot mean that overall it is less than what it is.
In some places higher and some lower and overall 420ppm.
–
So the problem is does a SST of say 14.9C global, at a pH of 8.12, dictate a level of approximately 420ppm?
We know that it should because they are the three variables plus atmospheric pressure needed to generate that observation.
If it is different or lower then one if the inputs is wrong.
As explained previously this would be fixed easily by using the correct surface area if water in the world which is larger than just the oceans themselves.
If on the other hand one sticks with the surface area being used the the chemistry and physics must be wrong.
Re arguing with sky dragons ignoring the GHG of CO2 is wrong, but so is equating CO2 to a heat engine that would have to actually produce heat from nothing to store it rather than accepting it acts as a thermal radiator of the heat put into it.
Blinkers can be used to ignore thes facts on all sides
This link shows the calculated ocean uptake rate for CO2 based on many thousands of ocean vessel crossings, drifting samplers, and moored buoys: https://socat.info/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/2023_Poster_SOCATv2023_release.pdf
.
The process collects samples of water near the ocean surface and compares the measured CO2 partial pressure in the samples to the atmospheric CO2 partial pressure. This has been measured many millions of times over the past 60 years. Figure 3 in the link shows the annual rate of ocean uptake over recent decades. While there is some variation around the trend, the overall trend shows 1) globally, uptake is always strongly positive and 2) there is a gradual increase in uptake rate as atmospheric CO2 has increased.
.
A graph on the SOCAT main page (https://socat.info/) shows how the partial pressure of CO2 in the water varies along individual ship tracks. In regions of upwelling, there is a net outgassing as water warms (as we would expect), but overall globally a strong net uptake.
angech (Comment #226105).
Mostly a coherent post. We are making progress.
.
angech: “The partial pressure of CO2 we use is a global average like global average surface temperature though we only refer one reference point in normal usage.
Would you be happy if I use 420 ppm for it for this year for the argument?”
.
420 ppm is fine. I don’t know the exact current value, but that is close enough. There are long term highly accurate measurements at many locations as well as many other measurements, so we know a lot about how CO2 varies with time and place. for the most part, it is everywhere within a few ppm of the global average. There can be localized values that are quite different.
.
angech: “So the problem is does a SST of say 14.9C global, at a pH of 8.12, dictate a level of approximately 420ppm?”
.
It does not. There is no reason why it should, unless you assume dynamic equilibrium. That amounts to assuming a result that must be empirically determined. SteveF (Comment #226107) provides details.
.
One quibble with SteveF: The release of CO2 in areas of upwelling is mostly not due to warming of that water. It is due to the very high concentration of CO2 in that water.
.
angech: “this would be fixed easily by using the correct surface area if water in the world which is larger than just the oceans themselves.”
.
If the system were in equilibrium, surface area would not matter.
Mike M,
It is due to both higher dissolved CO2 and rising temperature. See for example the graphic on this site: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/OceanCarbon Note that there is a very big difference in CO2 (as CO2 and bicarbonate) with a change in temperature from ~2C and 23C.
.
Yes, there is added CO2 from “organic rain”, but as I pointed out before, there is a limit to how much added CO2 can come from oxidation of that “organic rain”: the dissolved oxygen is reduced by only about half (on average) compared to saturated surface water, and that doesn’t represent a huge amount of CO2. Save for a few areas with large (organic rich) river outflows, there is nowhere the ocean becomes hypoxic.
Mike M. (Comment #226108)
“If the system were in equilibrium, surface area would not matter.”
–
Thanks. I agree with that at the moment.
–
So what is the figure and how far out is it?
If the system is in equilibrium then a SST of say 14.9C global, at a pH of 8.12, should dictate a level of approximately 420ppm overall and averaged.
Based on those parameters being correct.
I am not good enough with the maths to put the figures into the right equation and come up with the average PPM for a pH of 8.12 but I realise that a lot of people could do it.
If anyone could provide the ppm for that Alkalinity I would be very interested [happy].
–
My comment re surface area related to the idea that large amounts of water in the air are held in droplets with a pH of 5.5 say on average.
There is possibly a meter thick of water in the air all around the world at any one time with obviously a large potential surface area
Figures based on sea water surface with dissolved carbonates in solution at a higher pH might therefore be capable of producing an even higher ppm.
I like the thought of your idea that surface area should not matter as presumably the CO2 in the air matching the sea equivalents could also be true for the water vapor as it is still absorbing that level of CO2 from the air.
I will have to think about it.
angech,
I’m adding a type of figure to generate when discussing the “meat maker” part of my toy models for you. (Meat maker creates the data to be processed by the “Meat Grinder”. The Meat Grinder is the code that implements DK’s method.)
I’m mostly focused on making the “meat maker”, “just complicated enough”– that is, it has to have the features I think climate has but DK’s synthetic cases omitted. I’ll be discussing those when I first start putting data from the “meat maker” up. I’ll discuss why I’m putting them in.
I will not have made the “Meat Grinder” yet when I do that. So we will not know what “the sausage” looks like. (The Sausage comes out whne you put the meat into the meat grinder.)
Mike M ,
I should thank Steve F for putting up the links he has and the thoughts he has on the subject that he is sharing with you
.-
In answer to my question
angech: “So the problem is does a SST of say 14.9C global, at a pH of 8.12, dictate a level of approximately 420ppm?”
you said
“It does not. There is no reason why it should, unless you assume dynamic equilibrium.”
–
I’m sorry but I do assume dynamic equilibrium.
–
The oceans including the deep ocean have CO2 dissolved in at all depths.
There is no CO2 depleted area of deep cold water just waiting for an influx of CO2 from the Arctic and Antarctic.
It has been well mixed for 2 billion years and minor perturbations are not relevant.
The atmosphere has CO2 in it at all altitudes. It did not get there from fossil fuels, it has always been there..
–
The sea during the day at the equatorial surface and 30 degrees is brimming with outgassing CO2 during the day.
At the early hours of the morning the sea surface has been busy all night taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
Over 24 hours we have an average level of CO2 for that process all over the world.
Taking 30 million measurements over 20 years and saying that human output which is minuscule on the actual scale of venting and absorbing CO2 over the course of a day is the only cause is refusing to ask the basic questions of why is CO2 there at all, What source keeps it at that level on this world and how hard is it to actually make the planet pump more into the air other than by the temperature changes as it moves closer and further from the sun over the course of a year given the lopsided nature of the NH/SH water to land.
–
Thank you both for trying to help change my wrong views.
angech (Comment #226112): “It has been well mixed for 2 billion years”.
.
No. The ocean is not remotely well mixed. In fact, the ocean is actively unmixed.
.
There are large variations in seawater composition and temperature. If you descend at any given location you will pass through multiple layers of various origins. Those waters have taken hundreds or even thousands of years to get to where they are from the place that left its signature in its composition and temperature. Ocean currents maintain that structure in the face of dissipative processes.
.
The deep ocean is cold. That requires a mechanical process that actively maintains the temperature difference. Mixing would produce a near uniform vertical temperature, as happens in the Mediterranean. Surface temperature gradients drive winds that produce ocean currents, some of which provide a constant supply of cold water from the polar regions to the deep ocean. The ocean is actively unmixed.
SteveF (Comment #226109): “It is due to both higher dissolved CO2 and rising temperature.”
.
I guess that depends on how you look at it. CO2 degases from upwelling seawater because of the high concentration in that water. Less would degas if that upwelling water somehow did not warm.
.
SteveF: “Yes, there is added CO2 from “organic rain”, but as I pointed out before, there is a limit to how much added CO2 can come from oxidation of that organic rain”.
.
But is that limit significant? Henry’s constant for CO2 is about 27 times that for O2. Atmospheric O2 is 500 times atmospheric CO2. So almost 20 times as much dissolved O2 as CO2. Actually, I think, more like just 5 times as much when you account for the shifting bicarbonate/carbonate equilibrium. But then O2 is initially higher in deep water since it dissolved into cold surface water.
.
SteveF: “the dissolved oxygen is reduced by only about half (on average) compared to saturated surface water, and that doesn’t represent a huge amount of CO2. Save for a few areas with large (organic rich) river outflows, there is nowhere the ocean becomes hypoxic.”
.
I agree except for one thing: That corresponds to a huge amount of CO2.
.
If memory serves, deep water has 4-5 times the CO2 of surface water. So maybe half the available O2 gets consumed.
MikeM, angech
The way the ocean and weather on this planet works it will never be “well mixed”.
.
Consider this feature: The poles are cold, the equator is not. The system is inherently turbulent. eve if it weren’t the land masses aren’t just a bunch of randomly placed small islands.
What ends up happening is cold water “downwells” near certain coasts in polar region. You can see two locations near iceland and Canada in the figure below.
Owing to conservation of mass, and equal amount water must upwell somewhere. That water does come up somewhere else. When it does it is already warmer than the water that downwelled. And that water travel over the top of the ocean– being warmed by the sun and air as it travels. (Ben Franklin mapped one of these surface streams. So their existence is not new.)
What this is not is “ocean in equilibrium”. What this could hypothetically be over long enough time scales be some sort of “dynamically stationary” system meaning the statistics (i.e means and moments) as a function of position and time for temperature, speed, pressure etc are functions of position only– not time. But it is technically not what people call an “equilibrium”. Ok… some might say “equilibrium” when being lazy or sloppy. (I probably am guilty of this.). Or they might say it because they don’t know the term “statistically starionary”. But the system is stationary, not in equilibrium.
.
For some discussions the distinction between “equilibrium” and “starionary” does not matter. For others it does. It matters in the discussion you are having with others here.
For more see
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth103/node/847
Hot water rises (upwells) in certain specific places in the oceans.
Mike M,
“I agree except for one thing: That corresponds to a huge amount of CO2.”
.
Nope. I will do the stoichiometry and show you why that is mistaken. The “solubility” is pretty much irrelevant, since it is the buffering of the ocean (carbonate driven to bicarbonate by CO2) that causes most of the solubility of CO2 in the ocean. Henry’s law is not applicable.
SteveF (Comment #226121): “I will do the stoichiometry and show you why that is mistaken.”
.
I look forward to it. I admit that I have not done the the calculation as carefully as I should.
.
SteveF: “Henry’s law is not applicable.”
.
Agreed. The solubility is greater than implies by Henry’s Law. I made a crude estimate of a factor of 4. Perhaps too crude.
lucia (Comment #226119),
Very good description.
SteveF,
If I understand you correctly, you are making two claims:
(1) The amount of CO2 stored by the biological pump in the deep ocean is not large.
(2) The amount of CO2 stored in the deep ocean is limited by the availability of O2 to oxidize organic matter.
Did I misunderstand you?
.
I do not think both statements can be true. For water in equilibrium with air at 25C, dissolved O2 is 0.26 mM. Solubility is lower in seawater, but higher at lower T, so I will use 0.3 mM (probably too low). The volume of the ocean is 1.4e21 L, so 4e17 moles O2 (probably more), less what is consumed by respiration.
.
There are 1.8e20 moles of gas in the atmosphere, so 7.6e16 moles CO2. Then if the “organic rain” has consumed half the dissolved O2, the CO2 sequestered is about 3 times the total in the atmosphere.
Mike M. (Comment #226116): “So almost 20 times as much dissolved O2 as CO2. Actually, I think, more like just 5 times as much when you account for the shifting bicarbonate/carbonate equilibrium.”
.
I think I got that factor of four in the wrong direction. I might have to actually put some effort into this.
DeSantis asks to ban Students for Justice in Palestine at state schools. Are there any politicians who are principled defenders of free speech? Or is it only free speech for those who agree with the politician?
HaroldW
link? In what sense? (Not saying he isn’t. But I want to read what he said a bit more precisely.
I thought DeSantis wants to ban funding for those groups, but I have not looked into it.
—–
Addition:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/desantis-on-decertifying-pro-hamas-student-groups-this-is-a-material-support-to-terrorism-issue
What did the chapters of those Student groups really do? Was it against state law? Are they linked to Hamas? I actually want to know these things before deciding if DeSantis is violating freedom of speech or doing something else.
.
Naturally, the guardian article doesn’t tell us. Nor do they even tell us what they group is accused of doing.
.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/29/ron-desantis-florida-colleges-pro-palestinian-groups-ban
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/25/ron-desantis-pro-palestine-college-students-sjp
I’d like a fuller quote of what the pro-Palastinian groups said. Even “identifying” as “part of [the]… attack” might be hyperbole, and so speech. But it comes close to being… well… part of the attack. Depends what else they wrote.
Yeah… DeSantis is claiming the group is materially aiding the terrorists. If so, that is not “speech”. On the other hand, I’m not seeing evidence of them doing anything but talking- which is speech. Still looking.
Lucia (Comment #226119)
“The way the ocean and weather on this planet works it will never be “well mixed” in response to
“angech (Comment #226112): “It has been well mixed for 2 billion years”.
Thank you for your input and observations.
–
I will do a Willis Eschenbach type comment here.
He asks, as you do, for clarity in terms and expressions used.
Terms can be turned on their heads by quoting exceptions or in my case need lots of extra explaining to get the idea across that is missed when we just say, for example equilibrium, dynamic equilibrium or well mixed.
–
Your description of the earth climate surface being turbulent, even perhaps chaotic as some have said in trying to piece the bits together is indeed a very good description of how the system is seen to work with turbulence everywhere.
–
When I talk about equilibrium between the ocean surface and the atmosphere [and incidentally the other two [main] surfaces of earth air and earth ocean bottom [and sides] I am describing a chemical and physical concept of equilibrium or the process of equilibration that is always occurring at these surfaces.
It follows set rules which Mike M, SteveF etc are discussing even though they are having trouble getting the ideas and figures right.
–
Consideration that might help the concepts
Every gas in the atmosphere is in equilibrium with its dissolved components.
We do not talk about the oxygen and nitrogen dissolved in the water usually but they are there and their concentrations in the water should be such that their ppm reflect said amounts [MikeM is working on this].
That does not mean that the mass of O2 and N is millions of times greater because they have different solubilities at the current temperature but they are there and in my opinion well mixed for 2 billion years.
–
Well mixed is one of those terms open to interpretation depending on what angle one approaches it from.
When I say well mixed I mean that the ingredients have been distributed to every part of the mix by constant previous [2 billion years] of agitation.
There is Oxygen, Nitrogen and CO2 everywhere in the water at all levels and all conditions.
The amounts differ at different depths and temperatures, they have to.
That does not mean they are not in equilibrium for where they are.
Turbulence is only pushing things away from the well balanced equilibrium that exists everywhere in the water and in particular at the surface.
Yes “The poles are cold, the equator is not.
The system is inherently turbulent.”
The sun providers a massive range of energy and temperature change that varies over the night and day initiating the turbulence.
The Coriolis Force then augments the currents that develop.
–
To me these comments added together both describe an equilibration process
“What ends up happening is cold water “downwells” near certain coasts in polar region. Owing to conservation of mass, and equal amount water must upwell somewhere”.
and a concept process.
Does cold water actually sink or does the heat from the water below it move out quicker?
One could say that the heat moves out from the cold lowest ocean layer to fill the void being left by the upper cold layers radiation to space.
If so the CO2 increase is purely due to the now original but now colder water, heat gone to the top, absorbing more CO2 from the layer above it.
No transport at all from the surface.
Ah, science.
Sounds plausible to me if counter intuitive to the regular argument.
–
“That cold water displaces other water, and the cold stream travels along the ocean floor– making the bottom tend to be cold.
Of course some heat transfer will occur as it travels, but still, generally the downwelling brought “coldth” to the bottom.”
–
What this is not is “ocean in equilibrium”.
Ocean Surface for gas transfer or Ocean for heat and CO2 in solution.
–
The earth is a bottle of Coke [usual analogy] with gravity as its very tight lid.No matter where you put it the CO2 is tightly held unless opened and I do not see gravity going away soon.
If you heat one end the CO2 will gravitate to the colder fluid end.
If hot enough bubbles of CO2, O2and Nitrogen will come out in the hot end, just like when the sun passes over the sea.
” What this could hypothetically be over long enough time scales be some sort of “dynamically stationary” system meaning the statistics (i.e means and moments) as a function of position and time for temperature, speed, pressure etc are functions of position only– not time. But it is technically not what people call an “equilibrium”. Ok… some might say “equilibrium” when being lazy or sloppy. (I probably am guilty of this.). Or they might say it because they don’t know the term “statistically stationary”. But the system is stationary, not in equilibrium.”
–
I would ague that it is not hypothetical and that equilibrium means the concept that everything is in a dynamic system that has an equilibrium
where “the statistics (i.e means and moments) as a function of position and time for temperature, speed, pressure etc are functions of position only”.
When you add in time everything is in balance going back to a balance that exists but for the temporary perturbations.
–
or some discussions the distinction between “equilibrium” and “stationary” does not matter. For others it does. It matters in the discussion you are having with others here.
–
Yes I still feel my explanation is totally inadequate
though feel a sense of disquiet when others say Equilibrium [their concept] does not exist when it obviously [my concept and the science of fluids and gases] ]must.
lucia — sorry for not including the link. It was the Guardian article.
It sounded to me the SJP supported Hamas only by words. The students have a right to express their opinions, odious though they may be.
HaroldW,
Yes. Even if it was only words, a state school should be able to disband them. If they raised money or incited violance, they can be disbanded. I saw nothing to suggest the latter.
angech
They aren’t in equlibrium. Theres is no reason for them to be in equlibrium. It’s almost impossible for them to be in equlibrium. I mean… heck… the sun rises and sets every day.
.
Nope. I suspect few are. Water vapor over a cup of water is almost never in equilibrium with the water below it.
.
The ocean is not “well mixed”. Parts are hot; parts are cold. The cold hand hot parts are not mixed.
.
You can’t just make up odd meanings for these terms. Mixed means mixed. Not everything ends up mixed. If you shake a jar of water and sand and put it on the counter, the sand will settle. The contents will have “unmixed”.
.
Your explantions don’t work because you seem to think “If something has been there a long time, it will be “mixed”.” Likewise “if it’s been there a long time, everything inside the system will be in equilibrium”. That’s not necessarily what happens– because heat and work are doneon some systems. So…. just doesn’t happen.
.
You need to learn to distinguish ideas like “statistically stationary (or cyclo-stationary) which– as an approximation– may possible for the earth from things like “equilibrium” or “true steady state” which just aren’t possible.
I see nothing wrong with DeSantis cutting funding for groups that say they are part of Hamas. Yes, they have the right to free speech. They do not have the right to taxpayer funding. Neither does a neo-Nazi group. Or the Ku Klux Klan.
Mike M.: “I see nothing wrong with DeSantis cutting funding for groups that say they are part of Hamas. Yes, they have the right to free speech. They do not have the right to taxpayer funding. Neither does a neo-Nazi group. Or the Ku Klux Klan.”
While I personally agree that those three groups all have hateful opinions, where does one draw the line? A Democratic governor may well believe that a student group equating abortion to murder is expressing a repulsive opinion; some Republican governors would not. Or “Students against Affirmative Action”. Words can hurt, certainly, but they are not the same as weapons.
Lucia,
“Naturally, the guardian article doesn’t tell us. Nor do they even tell us what they group is accused of doing.”
.
Yup. The Guardian never provides facts, only their beliefs and (of course) endless outrage about any policy they disagree with. The Guardian is worse than biased: they are dishonest, and so irrelevant for any reasoned discussion. The tendency to shout outrage, completely absent factual reporting, is now so common in the MSM that it is shocking…. they all do it, but The Guardian is probably the worst.
MikeM
My guess is probably don’t get any funding. At Illinois, student groups weren’t funded by the university. They could form an organization. Then they could do things like apply to bring a speaker in the name of the organization rather than an individual student.
SteveF,
I think newspapers in general are bad at actually putting together informative articles. They structure is to not repeat what they might have reported yesterday or last week. I could click back a bit but still never find any accusations of what the students who support Hamas verbally did in anyway that is something other than speech.
.
If DeSantis knows something they did other than speech he should spit it out and tell us.
.
I know from all the “book banning” accusations that DeSantis can and does do this and that it is often barely reported. (He had a whole youtube video showing what was in books he wanted out of schools– opening the books and showing the graphics of blow jobs. The blow jobs happened to be male on male. Articles generally just reported he was trying to ban books that discussed gender issues. He probably does want a lot of just “gender issues” out– but failing to admit that the actually banned stuff is often… well… cartoons of male on male blow jobs.)
.
So I’m going to hunt around. But perhaps this time he really is just wanting to ban speech.
HaroldW (Comment #226139): “While I personally agree that those three groups all have hateful opinions, where does one draw the line?”
.
At advocating violence would be a good start. Certainly the line should be on this side of advocating genocide.
lucia,
Given the history between DeSantis and the MSM, I believe DeSantis until proven otherwise.
MikeM,
He’s been known to have press conferences that state his position quite clearly which are barely reported in news articles or opinion pieces. The conference showing the male-on-male blow jobs is one of them.
.
But I know politicians can also veer off in the direction of banning free speech. I’m just suspending judgement until I read an article that reports the story more fully rather than in an obviously cursory way. Right now I don’t have time to do more digging on that myself.
.
I am glad to be alerted of the potential issue.
Lucia, Mike M,
My understanding is that:
1) the organizations were banned only at state colleges and universities
2) The organizations were affiliated with the national organization, which states clearly that it is part and parcel of Hamas, not a separate organization.
3) The banned organizations are allowed to reform, at the same state colleges and universities, but not under a charter from the national organization, which says clearly it is part of Hamas.
.
Seems to me a great deal of smoke here, but no fire.
.
In a moderately positive development: “the Squad” of five socialist, anti-Israel congresswomen is getting a lot of pushback for their advocacy for Hamas, even from places like CNN. They have been advocating for the destruction of Israel since before election to Congress. Like all socialists, they have no morals, only political objectives….. to be achieved by any means available.
.
The pushback they get now is years late, but better than nothing.
Another unidentified aircraft originating from the area of the USS Ford is flying over Gaza. One was on station all day yesterday.
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1718986737588867458?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
SteveF,
If it’s as you say and they are affiliated with the national organization which is itself is part of Hamas and Hamas is actually carrying out terror, then that seems more than speech as they are saying they are part of Hamas which is carrying out terror.
.
It could be a thing that could get to SCOTUS using a variety of arguments.
.
But if the only condition is to break the chain of affiliation with HAMAS, and then reform, it looks like they are allowed all the speech they want. They just aren’t allowed to be “part of HAMAS” itself, either directly or through the proxy of the national organization.
The strangest thing here is that the crazy left (the squad is the poster child), wants Hamas to kill the Jews and destroy Israel, but at the same time they claim to support all ‘oppressed’ groups like LGBTxyz. Do they understand that Hamas wants to throw gays from rooftops, or do they not care? IMHO, they are either profoundly stupid or profoundly evil. Or maybe both.
At the end of another day of battle, the fields are strewn with Russian armor and KIA, even on top of the slag heap. I don’t predict how this will end because the Ukrainians are in a vulnerable position, but so far it has been a disaster for Russia.
Video from today’s fighting:
https://x.com/noelreports/status/1719021004771545297?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
Addendum to my post:
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
SteveF (Comment #226151): “The strangest thing here is that the crazy left …”
.
Such contradictions are not at all strange when you remember what the Left is about. This column at Power Line reminded me:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/10/the-issue-is-not-the-issue.php
And, of course, that point has other applications.
If you want to define the left as that defined by “the issue is revolution”, then you are using a definition so different from what the rest of the world speaks as to be useless. Are there leftwingers where its all about revolution? Yes. Are they even a sizable portion of those that would align as “left”, nope – that is far outside my experience.
.
I would say main stay of resistance to the “technological” solutions to reducing emissions is perception of costs relative to phasing out FF. That and inherent danger of geoengineering solutions that are not easily reversed. And note “perception”. Everyone I know would jump at cheap nuclear fusion.
New Open post: Contemplating oversimplified analysis.
| Data Comparisons | By: lucia
“The new post will be an open thread… but I’m contemplating a stupid analysis to see what we would “get” if we kinda sort of looked at the “cause effect” relationship in figures like those at Causality and Climate (the post at Judy Curry’s blog),
* We KNOW there should be a trend in CO2 because of fossil fuels. (Like… uhmmm… we know the water level in a huge pool will rise if we turn on a small hose that adds water. This happens even if the pool is “big” and yada, yada, yada…)“
–
Seems a good analogy on the surface.
The question though is where does the water in the hose come from?
Seriously.
For instance if the water comes from the huge pool in the first place it will only be replacing the water that is being taken out and the level would not change
Further if evaporation is occurring the small hose probably would not be able to supply enough water for the huge pool to maintain its level.
–
The overall idea at a basic level of maths, adding something makes something bigger is perfect.
–
Yet when we get to complex chaotic situations it helps to look at the pool, the water supply and the supply context in granular detail and understand the interactions.
We are not adding CO2, as the atmosphere cannot allow it to be added. The pool for CO2 in the atmosphere is fixed by the amount of all possible available CO2 in its various forms at levels determined by temperature and pressure variables only.
–
When we consider all the water on earth one can never add water to a pool in one place without dropping the water level in another pool elsewhere that you get it from.
I will have to add all other things being equal to stop all quibbles.
Only seeing the CO2 from fossil fuels as being a new and therefore extra amount of CO2 that never existed on the earth before drives every bit of logic on positing a GHG effect.
–
Somehow the atmosphere with an incredibly small amount of CO2 in it 420ppm has an incredibly small fraction added to it in a year (much less than 1%) that is supposed to drive all these changes.
–
The reality is that the CO2 in the atmosphere has come and can only come from all the massive stores of CO2 in the sea, water stores and earth surface.
Take all fossil fuels away and the atmosphere will still contain the same amount of CO2.
Because an equilibrium exists between all the available sources.
No fossil fuels per year but the same sinks?
The earth will put more CO2 into the air.
Put CO2 in from fossil fuels or volcanoes or forest fires the earth takes it out.
Sorry Russel, This war is a catastrophe for Ukraine. Those who are willing to fight to the last Ukrainian are morally bankrupt.
David Young,
Oh? Well, that’s a bald claim. I realize it’s your opinion. But there is a reason Ukranians are willing to fight to the last Ukranian. And it’s not “moral bankruptcy”.
Angech,
I can’t respond to all of that… but
No. Equilibrium does not exist between all available sources. I’m not even going to try to explain this over and over and over and over. But the notion that equilibrium is the “standard” case and non-equilibrium some sort of exception is so deluded that it’s almost just not worth engaging.
Fair enough.
Thank you for letting me put some ideas out there.
Since everyone disagrees, the problem has to be my concepts rather than my articulation.
Thanks to everyone else for trying to put me straight, a difficult task at the best of times.
Look forward to your results.
Phil Scadden,
“Everyone I know would jump at cheap nuclear fusion.”
.
Aside from the fact that fusion looks to be decades away (just as it has for the last 40 years!), it is likely, if finally developed, to be extremely expensive, based on the test designs now under construction, and much more expensive than current nuclear reactors. The obvious and immediate path to reduce fossil fuel use is nuclear power. The ‘left’ mostly reject it and fight endlessly to block reactor construction. I can see no rational basis for blocking nuclear power beyond the the desire to force a large reduction in material wealth. Of course, there is plenty of irrational fear of nuclear power, but it is just that: irrational.
The students can challenge this in court, my guess is they will likely win. They are basically being edgy activists providing “emotional” support to Hamas. Unless they are collecting funds and sending them to a designated terrorist group (which Hamas is) then my view is just let them be idiots. This is just virtue signaling from the right, another chapter in fighting the woke apocalypse. Dismantling DEI funding was legitimate, this not so much, unless they have some overt actions they can identify.
A propos of nothing in particular, this is what ballot stuffing looks like.
As a confirmed leftist I must say I don’t recognize most of what has been written here about either the Left or Leftists.
I must add that I have been more critical of aspects of the Left and of specific Leftists than what I see here–the major reason to be on the left is what has happened to the right, not because of any incredible virtues we espouse–but I think many in this thread are not really seeing things clearly. But perhaps it is me who has cloudy vision.
I didn’t follow the “book bans” that closely but it started out as a decision on which * physical * books were to be placed in the library. That’s just a limited resource issue and has nothing to do with a book ban, somebody has to decide which books are on the shelves. Ideological wars for sure, but not necessarily a free speech issue, Yawn. Nobody has a right to be in the school library.
.
I think there was some crazy people trying to overstep here on both sides later on.
I think the recent haranguing of the left here is just based on the “coalition of the oppressed” groups giving knee jerk support for Hamas behavior. Queers for Palestine and so forth. It’s irrational on its face so people are trying to find a common thread. Not very interesting really, just some unserious people saying unserious things, very loudly, IMO.
The new Beatles song dropped at 10:00AM today…. Thanks to a “found” cassette tape from Lennon and modern digital magic. Not their best work in my opinion.
https://youtu.be/AW55J2zE3N4?si=5Gq8-4ePOPHqYSNO
HaroldW (Comment #226241): “A propos of nothing in particular, this is what ballot stuffing looks like.”
.
Thanks. And there is similar video from Georgia in 2020. The claim that such things never happen is just willful blindness. What we don’t know is the extent to which it happens and whether it happens enough to change outcomes.
To be clear, it’s irrational on its face because the “danger to democracy” crowd doesn’t seem to understand the nature of an Islamic government, its oppression of women, its outright violent hostility toward most of their favored minority groups, and the minor fact that they just committed a huge atrocity they proudly filmed with GoPro cameras.
.
Now the slightly less insane part of those groups tries to separate Hamas and the Palestinians, but people are quite sensitive to whether they overtly hate Hamas or Israel more. It’s not hard to tell. Tearing down kidnapped posters of hostages is a hint. It’s unserious because all these people basically had no opinion on this intractable issue a month ago and they appear to have chosen sides based on some hard to decode and not well thought out moral structuring.
I think I mentioned a while back that the advanced weaponry we sent to Ukraine changed the rules of the game with Russia, here is the predictable outcome …
.
Russia’s Wagner Group May Provide Air Defense Weapon to Hezbollah, U.S. Intel Says
https://www.wsj.com/world/russias-wagner-group-may-provide-air-defense-weapon-to-hezbollah-u-s-intel-says-37dc8f45?st=vkzb316f2rsbuy9&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Lucia,
“And it’s not “moral bankruptcy”.”
.
No, the Ukrainians are not in any way morally bankrupt.
.
We in the USA may be spending a lot of money unwisely, and part of that is indeed a moral evaluation. FWIW, I am personally opposed to providing the Ukrainians with enough money and weapons that they can actually fight ‘to the last Ukrainian’. I think a political settlement is the only way the war will end, and very likely under terms not very different from today’s facts on the ground. But the damage (in lives, injuries, financial cost, and infrastructure destruction) only grows with each day of war.
Thomas Fuller,
Can you explain what you think has ‘happened on the right’?
.
I am intrigued, and would really like to know.
Steve, just for the sake of brevity I’d call it a drift towards fascism. I doubt if you see it that way, but it looks that way to me. Note I am not talking about Republicans or Conservatives in general. But the drift is there.
Thomas Fuller,
Odd then that I see the left as having adopted many policies and tactics which I can only describe as ‘fascist’: eg shouting down speakers they disagree with, censoring statements they disagree with, allowing criminal thugs to run rampant with no real consequences, insisting personal liberties must be taken to “flatten the curve”….. just for a couple of weeks… which turned into a year+, then tried their damndest to force people to accept a vaccination they did not want. In my 55 years as an adult, I have never seen the kind of government over-reach…. at the expense of individual liberty…. that I have seen in the last 3. I am appalled.
.
I agree that some conservative (‘right wing’) states have unwisely passed complete abortion bans after the reversal of Roe, but really, from my POV, liberty, and even life itself, is far more threatened most everywhere by the left than the right, as the vocal support for atrocities by Hamas on many campuses so clearly shows. YMMV, of course.
Hi SteveF
Yes, it is odd, isn’t it?
Study says reduction in pollution (aerosols) will lead to higher temperatures.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/11/former-head-of-nasas-climate-group-issues-dire-warning-on-warming/
.
Hansen from retirement says things are now worse than expected for a change. Disregard recent measurements, his new model says climate sensitivity is actually very high. Trigger events. Studies need to be revised with more aggressive models. Cataclysm imminent. The good news is there is now a divide in climate science between the catastrophists and the almost catastrophists.
SteveF,
I am totally unqualified to comment what “left” in USA says about nuclear, let alone their motivations, but I had assumed the brakes on nuclear power were largely economics. eg https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf
(When there is no government subsidy).
.
However, I am with David MacKay (Sustainable energy without the hot air) in being pro-arithematic rather than pro-nuclear, and for at least some countries in the world, getting to carbon-zero without nuclear seems extremely difficult.
Phil Scadden,
Yes, the cost of nuclear power has become too high due to the difficulty/cost of fear-driven regulations and endless legal fights/delays to construct and start a nuclear plant. The time-cost of capital is what has made nuclear power expensive. Only reform of regulations and laws that limit lawsuits which delay construction will reduce that cost. BTW, the time-cost of capital has already killed several off-shore wind power projects along the USA east coast as the US Fed has raised interest rates to control inflation, even after those projects received supply contracts with guaranteed prices per megawatt-hour that no nuclear plant would ever get.
.
The alternatives to nuclear (wind and solar) are intermittent and (worse!) produce power independent of demand, making large substitution for other power sources impractical, and ultimately making power even more expensive than nuclear. Nuclear plants do not present intermittency problems. A few places have enough hydro and geothermal available to not need nuclear to reduce CO2 emissions, but most do not.
Tom Scharf,
Hansen is 82. The world will not have to receive his wisdom for much longer.
SteveF,
.
82 not much longer? Don’t count on it.
.
Herb Weiss of Haystack fame just passed 105.
.
jf 81
John,
Not much longer compared to how long he has been at it (since the late 1980’s, when he started his global warming rampage).
.
Social Security says 50% of 82 YO men die within 6.77 years. Chance of Hansen reaching 100? Of 39,000 men alive at age 82, only 545 will still be alive at 100. (~1.4% chance) Reaching 105? Less than 1 chance in a thousand.
.
We are all but fragile vessels, doomed to ultimately sink, but of course I wish you a long and healthy life, and successes in your many projects as well. The destination is certain, but we can enrich the path. 😉
.
sf 73
“George Soros has spent over $40 million in the past decade to elect progressive prosecutors.” LELDF, Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
I am impressed at how successful he has been at getting it adopted across the country- 70 is the current tally. They are ubiquitous… North to South, East to West. 12 have been ousted in the past, but 8 are newly elected.
What is truly amazing is that it caught the Republicans flat-footed. They could do nothing to stop it, and still today, the Republicans are at a loss.
Map and link to reference:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1721173605654913063?s=20
Lucia,
I have been trying to post something that keeps getting sent to moderation and I can’t figure out why. I have rewritten it three times and it keeps getting spit canned.
I suppose I should add for the mariners who read here that Herb and Ruth (97) are in Maine aboard their American Tug 42 which they operate themselves.
.
They gave up on the Hallberg-Rassy 44 which they’d done crossing in about 8 years ago. Herb had had enough hauling sail-bags around.
There’s an error. They did an Atlantic crossing about 30 years ago. They sold the Hallberg Rassy about 8 years ago.
.
And the present boat is named Ancient Mariners and dinghy Rime.
.
john ferguson,
I would consider a crossing today in something like a Krogen 39 (with stabilizers). But my wife was done with cruising as soon as grandkids came into the picture 5 years ago.
Hi SteveF,
20 years ago we thought of the same thing, sell Arcadian and buy a Krogen 42, but then we wondered what we’d do over there and decided to stay in the US. We never even went to the Bahamas.
Humorously, from the files of one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.
.
WashPost: Trump and his allies are mapping out plans to use the government to punish opponents if he wins in 2024
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/05/trump-revenge-second-term/
“It would resemble a banana republic if people came into office and started going after their opponents willy-nilly,” said Saikrishna Prakash, a constitutional law professor at the University of Virginia who studies executive power. “It’s hardly something we should aspire to.”
.
Outrage! Discretionary prosecutorial powers might be used for political retribution. No word on where the reporters and constitutional law professors have been the last several years. Got to love the picture they chose for the article, ha ha.
john ferguson,
We spent probably 6-8 months total in the Bahamas with ~15-20 crossings of the Gulf Stream. There are many beautiful places in the Bahamas to anchor out for several days at a stretch…. lots of fresh fish, conch, and lobster. What’s not to like?
.
We often went 3 days without seeing another boat, save for the occasional fisherman in a small outboard offering lobsters or conch.
.
The last half dozen times we went (ending ~4 years back), there was broadband wireless almost everywhere. The Bahamians use tall cell towers, and cell signals carry great distances with nothing to obstruct the signal; I routinely worked on-line while sitting at anchor, linked to a cell tower 15+ miles away. With Musk’s Starlink marine service, you can now work anywhere on Earth without breaking the bank.
john ferguson,
Here is a photo from one of my favorite anchorages: Double Breasted Cays: https://postimg.cc/xqx6LCrL
.
Absolutely stunning views and water.
john ferguson,
Our last trip was to the keys with my youngest daughter (13 at the time): https://postimg.cc/4m3NFWFr
.
Her best Titanic pose at daybreak in the FL keys; sunset bay, Key Largo.
.
I sold the boat a year later.
SteveF, note that the EIA paper costs storage for intermittant resource and include is cos I would have to delve into their NEMS model to see what assumptions are made for that. And perhaps, what the hell they mean by “Advanced Nuclear”.
.
Is there any federal obstacle (ie political power exercised by nuclear opponents), to stop a company building a nuclear plant should they wish (and have investors available)?
USN Ohio class Submarine, possibly the USS Florida, was spotted in the Suez Canal headed toward the Mediterranean Sea. USS Florida is armed with 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, which would be the weapon of choice in this conflict. More ominous, it was sporting a dry deck shelter attached to its deck.
A dry deck is used to launch and retrieve Navy Seal teams while submerged.
Ohio Class sub with dry deck photographed in the Suez Canal:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1721433350529835487?s=20
Officially:
U.S. Central Command, @CENTCOM:
“On November 5, 2023, an Ohio-class submarine arrived in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility.”
The sub was escorted by the destroyer USS Gravely.
Also today from Central Command:
“On November 5, 2023, a U.S. Air Force B-1 Lancer begins aerial refueling from a KC-135 Stratotanker assigned to the 912th Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron while conducting a Bomber Task Force mission over the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility.”
We may not be in this fight, but we are nibbling around the edges.
NYT, today:
“ Officials say the Biden administration has also sent messages to Iran and Hezbollah, through regional partners including Turkey, that the United States is prepared to intervene militarily against them if they launch attacks against Israel.”
Perhaps yesterday’s saber rattling from Central Command is intended to reinforce the threats from Blinkin.
Free NYT link:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/05/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-blinken-iraq.html
Even the deaf-blind-dumb Boston Globe now recognizes the war in Ukraine is unlikely to end any time soon. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/the-ukraine-war-has-no-end-in-sight/ar-AA1jrG2v
.
No sweeping victory is in sight, and at present there is no desire for negotiation. A long, bloody, costly stalemate is what the future in Ukraine increasingly looks like. Seems to me the Globe is about half way to thinking about rational policy, which starts with asking the question: is this really worth it? Maybe a year from now they will start asking that question.
Phil Scadden,
“Advanced Nuclear” usually means systems that are designed to be inherently ‘fail-safe’, which means exactly what those words say: any conceivable failure leads to a reactor that automatically ends up in a safe condition, even with zero operator action. For example: No need for external power to keep a shut-downed reactor cool. Advanced nuclear often uses low pressure cooling like liquid salts or liquid sodium which (unlike water) don’t operate much above atmospheric pressure…. drastically reducing containment structural costs. Needless to say, the existing worldwide fleet of 400+ reactors are not fail-safe.
Lucia, in my spare time I was able to analyze the GMST and atmospheric CO2 concentrations 1979-2022 using differencing and series decomposition with the ceemdan function in R.
After smoothing, I could obtain cross correlations with a GMST lag of 9 months at an r=0.52 with both methods. When I attempted to calculate confidence intervals using Monte Carlo with an arima model, I was not able to obtain stationary residuals and am now going to look at non parametric bootstrapping to obtain confidence intervals.
While the lag agrees in direction with that found in the HOE paper, the decomposition components used for cross correlation were small compared to the trend component and further were cyclical without a trend.
Of course, this comparison means nothing until I have established confidence intervals for the r from cross correlation.
Nikki Haley polled the best in battleground states against Biden. Although I’d prefer DeSantis after seeing him govern Florida he is probably done. There seems to be a rule that the early frontrunner never survives the years long onslaught of negative coverage. These people might want to not even campaign or announce candidacy until the very last moment. Voters tend to like a shiny new object. Hope, change …
.
Trump seems more and more inevitable every day. Barf, barf, barf.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226416): “Nikki Haley polled the best in battleground states against Biden. Although I’d prefer DeSantis after seeing him govern Florida he is probably done.”
.
I do not believe that Haley can beat Trump head to head. If DeSantis is done (I don’t think he is), then Trump will be the nominee.
.
A recent Des Moines Register poll shows 27% have decided on Trump, 40% considering Trump, and presumably the rest decided against Trump. Haley’s support is in that last group, I don’t see where she has much chance of gaining ground among the populist Republican voters. If Haley drops out, most of her support goes to DeSantis. If DeSantis drops out, most of his support goes to Trump.
.
Pretty good discussion of that poll here:
https://unherd.com/thepost/dont-count-ron-desantis-out/
A DeSantis / Haley ticket may be the only hope, but still not enough today. Still a long way to go. A Haley / DeSantis ticket might even pickup more independents, ha ha.
“3,000 Sailors and Marines Arrive in Middle East aboard USS Bataan, USS Carter Hall”
I had forgotten that the US Marines were already in the area.
https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/NEWS-ARTICLES/News-Article-View/Article/3485113/3000-sailors-and-marines-arrive-in-middle-east-aboard-uss-bataan-uss-carter-hall/
Tom Scharf (Comment #226418): “A DeSantis / Haley ticket may be the only hope”.
.
Not buying it. Haley is anathema to many who support Trump’s policies, even if they have had it with Trump. Anyway, that sort of ticket balancing is so 20th century.
Ton Scharf,
“A DeSantis / Haley ticket may be the only hope, but still not enough today. Still a long way to go. A Haley / DeSantis ticket might even pickup more independents, ha ha.”
.
They might beat Trump if everyone else dropped out tomorrow. Everyone else won’t. And neither Haley nor DeSantis is ready to take second place. Absolutely not happening.
It really does look like crazy Trump V demented Biden, as sad as that reality is.
Ken Fritsch,
“Of course, this comparison means nothing until I have established confidence intervals for the r from cross correlation.”
.
Sure, that is formally the case. But the perfectly rational case remains: If you effectively detrend the data, then there is no way the analysis provides meaningful information about causation in the long term trend.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226415)
“ I was able to analyze the GMST and atmospheric CO2 concentrations 1979-2022 using differencing and series decomposition with the ceemdan function in R.
After smoothing, I could obtain cross correlations with a GMST lag of 9 months at an r=0.52 with both methods.
the lag agrees in direction with that found in the HOE paper”
–
SteveF (Comment #226423)
“the perfectly rational case remains: If you effectively detrend the data, then there is no way the analysis provides meaningful information about causation in the long term trend”
–
The argument was that CO2 cannot be the cause of the temperature rise where the temperature rise precedes the CO2 rise.
The data is detrended.
Ken finds the conclusion of the paper is correct with CO2 lagging temperature by 9 months by his maths.
The perfectly rational explanation is that CO2 cannot therefore be the cause of the temperature rise.
The tail does not wag the dog.
–
Despite a lot of caveats .
Despite a lot of reasons, not just white guilt.
The perfectly rational case falls over if the paper is correct, if Ken is correct.
Feynman said one proper debunking of a theory means the theory has no legs.
SteveF you are heavily invested in this, fair enough, having given a lot of thought over the years to the subject and with a lot of reasons for why CO2 by humans should be an addition and cause a temperature rise.
Yet if, If, it does not compute at the simplest level will you stick with your beliefs or the science?
SteveF (Comment #226423)
November 6th, 2023 at 3:31 pm
Yes, Steve, I knew going in that there are two different processes that have different lags for GMST and CO2 and was looking for a simple way to show that empirically. I just felt that being able to put reasonable confidence intervals on the HOE process-derived cross correlations and show that the differenced GMST and CO2 series inputs have no trend and are cyclical might accomplish my mission.
Doing cross correlations on near straight line trends like those of GMST and CO2 for the period 1979-2022 will not show any lags even when intentionally offset – but of course we already know that increased CO2 (and the GHG equivalent) concentrations in the atmosphere cause most of the unnatural GMST increases.
I put the odds of a Trump/Biden rematch under 50%, with Biden being the less likely of the two to be on the ballot. Biden had two things going for him: (1) He can be controlled by the Dem bosses (I admit to being unclear just who they are). (2) He is is the proven Trump beater. With the latter looking less and less the case, Biden’s dementia becoming more and more obvious, and the criminal evidence mounting against Biden, I think the Dem bosses will dump him.
.
I still think that DeSantis has a 50-50 chance against Trump, mano a mano. But Haley might well deny him that chance by consolidating Establishment support, thus squeezing DeSantis in the middle.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226392): “Nobody wants kids to get entangled in this conflict.”
.
Not true. Hamas very much wants kids entangled in the conflict. They want to kill Israeli children. I am not saying that they are willing to accept the deaths of Israeli children as collateral damage. They want to kill Israeli children as a primary target. And Hamas wants the IDF to kill Palestinian children. The more Palestinian children who die, the better.
Mike M,
“Haley might well deny him that chance by consolidating Establishment support”
.
I completely agree. Haley is the ‘default’ establishment Republican candidate… not as blatantly stupid and silly as “Jeb!”, but close. Can she possibly win the nomination? I very much doubt it. Her policy views are essentially Biden’s without the grotesque corruption and money laundering. Endless taxpayer money for Ukraine and it’s corruption? YES! Putin is THE DEVILE’s Devil? Yes! All US wars in the middle East were prudent? YES, of course!
.
IMO, she is disconnected from the Republican electorate.
.
That doesn’t work for the Republican base, never mind in the general election.
SteveF (Comment #226428): “Her policy views are essentially Biden’s”.
.
On foreign policy, especially where military action might be involved, that is pretty much true. An exception would be Iran. But both Biden and Haley are basically creatures of the neocon foreign policy and “defense” establishment.
.
On economic and domestic policy, I think Haley’s views line up pretty well with the U.S. Chamber of Congress; i.e., with Wall Street, K Street, and corporate boardrooms. She tries to sound like she cares about Main Street, but most Republican voters have been on to that game for the best part of two decades and, post Trump, are no longer willing to play along.
With the US saber-rattling cranked up to high, I got to wondering what the 82nd and 101st airborne were up to… I looked but things are quiet. It’s not like us to parade the Air Force, Navy and Marines through a combat zone and leave out the Paratroopers. It’s not a party till the airborne gets there. Stay tuned.
CO2 in atmosphere in part due to-
–
volcanoes.
–
These differ from “natural” sources which ebb and flow each year.
While not on the same scale as human emissions they are a continuous addition of CO2 otherwise not available.
–
Anyone wishing to blame human emissions must take this other additive source into consideration and explain why the earth can add the equivalent of thousands of years of significant cumulative emissions without an ever increasing CO2 level and temperature rise.
–
I feel sure an “excuse” will be found to overcome this obvious logical point.
Sinks that somehow come into existence at the same level as the volcano emissions arise but somehow do not work for human emissions perhaps?
Human emissions of CO2 are approximately 60 times greater than volcanic emissions. Volcanoes are not what is causing atmospheric CO2 to rise.
.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities
Mike M,
You can sum up Haley in one word: Jeb!
Mike M. (Comment #226126)
: “So almost 20 times as much dissolved O2 as CO2. Actually, I think, more like just 5 times as much when you account for the shifting bicarbonate/carbonate equilibrium.”
–
MikeM
“Patm, the atmospheric pressure, is the sum of all of the partial pressures of the atmospheric gases added together: Patm = PN2 + PO2 + PH2O + PCO2= 760 mm Hg. The pressure of the atmosphere at sea level is 760 mm Hg. Therefore, the partial pressure of oxygen is: PO2 = (760 mm Hg) (0.21) = 160 mm Hg, while for carbon dioxide: PCO2 = (760 mm Hg) (0.0004) = 0.3 mm Hg.”
–
Would this mean there is 530 times more oxygen dissolved in water than CO2 ?
It explains why N and O2 are in the air at their concentrations. Nothing to do with Oxygen or Nitrogen sinks and pumps.
Looks like 5 candidates for Wednesday’s debate: DeSantis, Nikki!, Vivek, Sir Chris the Dragon Slayer, and Little Timmy Scott. Not trying to pump the debate, just pointing out that the field is narrowing.
Mike M,
The debate would be better absent Christy… and maybe Scott as well. I have read that Democrats are contributing to Christy to keep him qualified for the debate; don’t know if it is true. Christy has zero to add.
Mike M,
You were right about the relative size of the biological pump vs the solubility pump: the biological pump is estimated to be ~twice as large overall (in terms of total CO2 moved to depth) as the solubility pump. But at the same time, the net increase in ocean uptake with rising CO2 appears to be mainly driven by the solubility pump.
.
That is, the total increase in CO2 sequestered by increased solubility (and thermo-haline circulation) dominate a smaller increase in sequestration due to the biological pump. Primary production in the ocean is not increased as much by higher CO2 at the ocean surface as solubility is increased. Which I guess makes sense considering that primary production is usually limited in the ocean by scarce “micro-nutrients”, like iron, not by availability of CO2.
.
On land, biological sequestration (mainly as cellulose) has increased much more as CO2 has increased, in part due to slightly longer growing seasons at high latitudes with warmer temperatures, but mostly due to net “fertilization” of land plants by higher CO2.
The US definitely has saber rattling turned up to maximum. Apparently both Lebanon and Iran have been informed through back channels that the US will enter the war if they join the war against Israel. The good news for the US is that our threats usually are backed up, so not a lot of bluffing, ignoring Obama’s red line on Syria. So far these threats are working. The US entering a war in the Middle East will not help Biden one bit.
.
For all you passivists out there, this is another example of attempting to avoid conflict by threatening conflict. Peace through strength. It might work, it might not, but you can see the logic here. It’s a complicated world. Alternately if we signal we are tired of endless wars then the Middle East might become an inferno. Maybe that is OK strategically but probably not. Maybe the players involved weren’t interested in entering the war anyway. Please raise your hand if you know the answer, knowing what you know today, not looking back later.
.
“Netanyahu: Israel Will Control Gaza Security Indefinitely” – That sounds like a bad idea if you ask me. Occupations in mega-hostile territories are not going to go well. Not that there are a long list of good ideas at this point.
Tom Scharf,
“Not that there are a long list of good ideas at this point.”
.
I would be thrilled if there were even a very short list of good ideas. Beyond trying to kill the bad guys, I don’t see ANY good ideas. Mealy-mouthed apologists like Obama offer only terrible ideas that will guarantee the continued existence of Hamas and endless atrocities against the “occupiers”. The worm named Barak Obama has even started describing Israel as “occupiers”….. what an ignorant a$$hole!
.
FWIW, I think Israel might benefit form using a combination of carrot and stick, like offering to relocate some Palestinians to the West Bank and build them housing, while getting rid of Hamas in Gaza. Would it work? Donno.
There seems to be variable meanings to “occupation” with respect to Israel. Usually the hard core activists mean Israel’s occupation of 1940’s era Palestine, but sometimes people mean an effective occupation of the West Bank or Gaza. I’ve pretty much given up reading anything with occupation, genocide, apartheid, colonizers. It’s all low information grand standing stuff.
I continue to support the supply of US arms to Ukraine. My support has for a long time been contingent on two factors:
First, the Ukrainian people must be willing to fight, and second, they must be effectively wielding the US arms to degrade the Russian war machine.
For the past month, both criteria have been met and met at a very high level.
On the Ukrainian people’s will to fight:
“Over eight in 10 Ukrainians (81%) surveyed in July and August said they approved of the job that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is doing. His approval is statistically undiminished from the record-high 84% measured a little over a year ago, as the country’s residents exhibited an unprecedented level of unity and faith in their institutions.” Gallup, OCTOBER 16, 2023
https://news.gallup.com/poll/512621/ukrainians-continue-rally-around-president-military.aspx
And, President Zelenskyy’s daily inspirational messages to his people:
“Everyone who helps Ukraine regain its security, everyone who defends our country and works for it, who strengthens partnerships for security, for common strength. Everyone who exerts pressure on the terrorist state is a defender of freedom and humanity.” [Yesterday]
I know we are all used to Iron Dome shooting down Gaza launched rockets, but today an interception of a different caliber occurred. Israel intercepted a ballistic missile attack from Yemen. Link here. I’m not sure if this has ever happened outside of tests – a real hostile missile interception at midcourse flight.
[Edit: What if anything will the U.S. do to Iran in retaliation? Waiting to see with baited breath.]
This happened yesterday actually, my mistake.
SteveF (Comment #226437): “You were right about the relative size of the biological pump vs the solubility pump”.
.
Good to know. 🙂
.
SteveF: “the net increase in ocean uptake with rising CO2 appears to be mainly driven by the solubility pump … Which I guess makes sense considering that primary production is usually limited in the ocean by scarce “micro-nutrients”, like iron, not by availability of CO2.”
.
That is certainly the conventional wisdom. But it might not be quite rate. There is good reason to doubt the assumption of constant Redfield Ratios. Organisms vary in their ratios of carbon to micro-nutrients, so marine ecosystems might evolve to favor “CO2 loving” organisms, thus increasing the rate of carbon sequestration compared to other nutrients and increasing the strength of the biological pump for CO2.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226438): “this is another example of attempting to avoid conflict by threatening conflict.”
.
To work, the threat must be believed. Such a threat from Trump would be believed, but Iran might decide that Biden is bluffing.
Mike M,
If there has been any change in micro-organisms in the ocean surface due to higher CO2, I have seen no published evidence of that.
Angtech. The earth’s systems for removal of CO2 from atmosphere operate very slowly but have been steadily reducing the CO2 content of atmosphere over geological time with consequent cooling.
Volcanic CO2 has different isotope signature to FF CO2. The change in isotopic concentration of CO2 in atmosphere is consistant with FF source.
Phil Scadden (Comment #226447)
“The earth’s systems for removal of CO2 from atmosphere operate very slowly but have been steadily reducing the CO2 content of atmosphere over geological time with consequent cooling.”
–
Sound and fury signifying what exactly?
Geological time?
Cooling?
Consequent?
Reducing CO2 content of the atmosphere?
Earths systems of removing (only) CO2?
–
CO2 has been claimed to be pretty stable with pretty stable temperature over one recent measure of geological time surely.
–
The point is the earth generates CO2 in the atmosphere by itself, which it does.
and removes it from the atmosphere.
Over all periods of time.
Naturally.
Earth water atmosphere sun pressure gravity.
CO2 is always there on an earth like planet.
What happens when an extra source puts more CO2 in?
Volcanoes.
Fossil fuels.
Respiration.
It either builds up causing problems.
Or it does not.
No having your cake and eating it too.
If fossil fuels are a problem then so are volcanoes which have been adding CO2 in significant amounts for dare I say geological times
–
As for
“Volcanic CO2 has different isotope signature to FF CO2.”
Is a very dubious argument.
Mark, wasn’t the Yemen rocket shot down by a US weapon? Possibly incorrect attribution by my source?
John,
If you can find a link to support that, link it for me please! I can find links to US Navy ships shooting down cruise missiles and drones a week ago, but I have found nothing to contradict the stories about Israel shooting down a ballistic missile from Yemen so far.
But link me if I’m wrong!
I seem to have the dates wrong.
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/11/07/the-deadly-missile-race-in-the-middle-east
All the links I find (and I find many) tell variants of this tale.
I’ll look, we could both be right, one each for us and israel.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-shot-down-ballistic-missile-fired-yemen-us-officials-say-rcna122936
Yeah. What I gather is that the US Navy shot some stuff down on Oct 19’th and Israel shot down a missile on Halloween.
Iran seems to be exploring exactly where our limits are, very annoying. Nuke’em from orbit, it’s the only way to be sure. Perhaps that’s a bit too harsh.
Angtech – Quick explanationf earth thermostat here – https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adf3379.
For long CO2 removal (and temperature cooling) over past 60my see https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-earth-082420-063026, in particular Fig 5.
.
If CO2 input closely matches CO2 sequestration, then concentrations stable. Increase CO2 input by 60x and concentrations go up.
.
What makes the isotope argument “dubious”?
mark bofill: “Waiting to see with baited breath.”
Just wondering…what do you use for bait?
[Yes, I know it’s a typo. But some typos are more fun than others.]
HaroldW,
Maybe baited breath is when you eat some of the squid you are using for bait. 😉
Phil,
There is nothing dubious about any of a half dozen clear explanations. You are wasting your time.
Looks like Republicans are taking another beating over abortion, losing in Ohio on an abortion constitutional amendment, and losing control of the VA house. Will they ever adopt reasonable compromise policies on abortion? I doubt it; the morally righteous never compromise, whether on the left or right. I note that righteousness and arrogance are usually two sides of the same coin.
One of my criteria for supporting US arms to Ukraine is they must be effectively wielding the US arms to degrade the Russian war machine.
The visual evidence confirms that the Russians are losing war material at an enormous rate. ISW quoted an OSINT source last week that used satellite images and counted over 200 Russian vehicles lost on the approach to Avdiivka since October 1.
Here is confirmation by another video from a few days ago. Note not only the fresh kills but also the staggering number of burnt-out pieces of armor littering the battlefield. The Russian column has to navigate around the remains of their own wrecks.
https://x.com/anno1540/status/1720142909712802096?s=20
And it’s not only around Avdiivka. They used cruise missiles to take out a brand-new Russian warship a few days ago. The ship was in a supposedly protected harbor 250 km from the Ukrainian lines.
https://x.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1721599186582343826?s=20
Fighter aircraft, air defenses, and rear support facilities have all been lost in the past week.
This has gone on for nearly two years. The Russian army will not be a threat to Europe for many years.
HaroldW. I still like Nom de clavier the best.
Phil Scadden (Comment #226456)
–
What makes the isotope argument “dubious”?
–
There are two lines.
The isotope argument depends on observing that the four pools of CO2 have different amounts of the isotopes and then arguing that the changes in the atmospheric pool can only come from adding fossil fuel CO2 to the atmosphere.
Yet the same reasoning for the different amounts of isotopes ignores the fact that the atmospheric pool always has a notable difference to the isotopes in the ocean at all stages of current and past measurement.
The reason being that the heavier isotopes cannot get into the atmosphere as easily as the normal isotope from the ocean.
With increasing temperature this difference is exaggerated, ie the
isotope changes over the last 40 years are only due to the higher temperatures over that time.
It should also be noted that it is extremely hard to get accurate isotope measurements for any claimed area of study as the error range is extremely high and dependent on the actual weather conditions each day at each site which understandably do not translate well into scientific proof.
–
The second reason for being dubious is the anti chemistry and anti physics line being adhered to so strongly by SteveF et al as is his right.
Most chemical reactions are two way streets, they exhibit reversibility of the equations depending on changes in conditions like energy input, pressure temperature etc.
If one argues that putting excess or new CO2 from fossil fuels in for 40 years at 30 Gt can cause an effect because there are sinks that cannot cope with it then putting in 0.6GGT for 1000 years would have double that effect.
One cannot argue that the sinks only get overloaded by fossil fuels but not by volcanoes for instance.
Nature does not have a choice.
If extra CO2 is put in from any source, extra CO2 has to be removed from the atmosphere because chemistry and physics.
Searching for proof of a fossil fuel signature is admirable, disregarding the fact that all pools have always existed and put isotopes into the atmosphere which are removed and concentrated in the sea [fact] is bunkum.
I hesitate to add but Murray Selby and Roy Spencer wrote about this as far back as 2012.
MikeM,
About 5 gases are present in the atmosphere contributing to the atmospheric pressure of 760 mmHg.
“Patm, the atmospheric pressure, is the sum of all of the partial pressures of the atmospheric gases added together:”
So here is the conundrum derided repeatedly.
PO2 = (760 mm Hg) (0.21) = 160 mm Hg,
pN = say 600 mm Hg as they are the bulk of the atmosphere
The concentration of O2 in the water must be 530 times that of CO2 at the surface [keeps fish alive] [pCO2 0.3 mm]]
The concentration of N at the surface must be approx 2500 times that of CO2.
Now go down to depth and Coolness and the O2 and N2 are much higher in guess what?
Almost precisely the same ratio as that of the CO2.
–
No need for fancy and wrong arguments about cold water become dense and sinking, about CO2 production in the surface layers by plants or fossil fuels from the air at depth. Just straight forward chemistry that all of the scientists and thinkers here know but try to pretend that CO2 has some special unique quality to other gases in solution.
SteveF (Comment #226460): “Looks like Republicans are taking another beating over abortion, losing in Ohio on an abortion constitutional amendment, and losing control of the VA house. Will they ever adopt reasonable compromise policies on abortion?”
.
Abortion was legal in Ohio up to 22 weeks. Youngkin wanted a 15 week limit in Virginia. Those are reasonable compromise positions. And they lost. They lost because the Dems lie about abortion and their massive media arm supports the lies.
.
And it appears that you have bought at least part of the lie. It is the Dems who have an unreasonable position and will not compromise.
Huh. My whole life, I never realized ‘bated’ was a thing.
Thanks Harold!
Mike M,
Dems have used abortion as a bludgeon, and yes, often been dishonest about it. But I do not buy their lies. On the other hand you have DeSantis signing a ‘heartbeat’ ban, which is effectively a complete ban, along with people like Lindsey Graham suggesting national legislation to restrict abortions, and many red states outright banning. Like it or not, reversing Roe and immediately adopting bans in many states has cost Republicans dearly….. and I think will continue to.
Abortion should be resolved by voter referendums, that is fine by me. It’s not that complicated of a subject. This is a losing wedge issue for Republicans, the sooner it is resolved the better.
The NYT talks to some Hama’s leaders:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/08/world/middleeast/hamas-israel-gaza-war.html
“But in the bloody arithmetic of Hamas’s leaders, the carnage is not the regrettable outcome of a big miscalculation. Quite the opposite, they say: It is the necessary cost of a great accomplishment — the shattering of the status quo and the opening of a new, more volatile chapter in their fight against Israel.”
“We succeeded in putting the Palestinian issue back on the table, and now no one in the region is experiencing calm.”
“I hope that the state of war with Israel will become permanent on all the borders, and that the Arab world will stand with us”
“What could change the equation was a great act, and without a doubt, it was known that the reaction to this great act would be big,” Mr. al-Hayya said.
But, he added, “We had to tell people that the Palestinian cause would not die.”
““Hamas’s goal is not to run Gaza and to bring it water and electricity and such,” said Mr. al-Hayya, the politburo member. “Hamas, the Qassam and the resistance woke the world up from its deep sleep and showed that this issue must remain on the table.”
“This battle was not because we wanted fuel or laborers,” he added. “It did not seek to improve the situation in Gaza. This battle is to completely overthrow the situation.”
.
As has been stated before, listen to what Hamas is saying out loud.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226468): “Abortion …. It’s not that complicated of a subject.”
.
You have got to be kidding.
Abortion is not complicated for voters to understand, as compared to climate change where people have to choose and take the word of outside experts where a lot of uncertainty exists. Abortion is primarily a values choice between the life of the mother and life of the child. Nobody needs to read the IPCC to determine how to vote.
.
In the case of climate change outside propaganda, the media, and institutions can sway the votes. I don’t think many people switch positions on abortion based on a media sermon.
> As has been stated before, listen to what Hamas is saying out loud.
.
This is why the Netanyahu administration has boosted Hamas for years. Hamas and RWer Israelis both see benefit in an equilibrium of violence.
In my spare time I did some cross-correlations using the monthly global mean surface temperature (GMST) and atmospheric CO2 concentrations (CO2) over the period 1979-2022. For GMST I used HadCRUT.5.0.1.0 from here https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut5/data/current/download.html and for CO2 for CO2 I used the data from here https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2/co2_mm_gl.txt.
I analyzed the data by two methods with the first involving an attempt to reproduce the differencing analysis in the HOE paper and the second using Complete Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition with Adaptive Noise (CEEMDAN) to decompose both series into 9 individual components that included a trend. I used the ccf function in R to obtain cross-correlation plots for observing the lag factor and, in addition, what the plots could reveal about the structure of the series being cross correlated. The main thrust of my analysis resides in the visual comparisons of the cross- correlation plots plus finding significant lagged correlations and what that might suggest.
For the HOE method the cross-correlation showed a pattern with repeating peaks and valleys indicating the correlated series had a repeating cyclical character. The main lag nearest zero lag was at -10 with a positive correlation of r=0.54. The lags here are reported for temperature which means in the above case temperature peaks at lag -10 months preceded CO2 peaks as was found in HOE. The cross-correlation plot showed a pattern strongly suggestive of a cyclical series and not unlike that of the ENSO series. That pattern would take the differenced series out of the realm of trends and what would be expected to explain the temperature increase from GHGs. An attempt to estimate confidence intervals for r with Monte Carlo simulations and an arima model did not work because the residuals were not stationary. I finally settled on the non-parametric jackknife method with the 95% [0.40,0.68].
To obtain more understanding of what the cross correlation means and to quantify the results, I did ceemdan decompositions on both series using both CO2 and log of CO2. There was very little difference in the results between CO2 and log of CO2. I found a lagged correlation from the decomposition method, where the results compared well with those of the differencing method, by combining the decomposed components of series 6 and 7 for both CO2 and temperature. The ceemdan components are numbered with the highest number (9) being the trend and the decreasing number indicating increasing frequency. The cross correlation plot was similar to that using HOE differencing. The major peak nearest to zero lag was at -10 and the lagged correlation was 0.53 with confidence intervals: 95% [0.45, 0.61]. It is important to note that the component CO2 and temperature series were cyclical, did not have trends and had amplitudes much smaller than the trend.
The decomposed trends for CO2 and temperature are trending upward as near straight lines and as such cross correlation will not show any lag peaks other than at 0.
I know that the ENSO changes can affect the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere as described in the linked article here : https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20170009397/downloads/20170009397.pdf . Since ENSO affects so many sources and sinks for CO2 and the ENSO temperature change is regional, measuring a direct temperature to CO2 correlation from its likely small effects would take some digging. If similar processes exist, it would be interesting to find a cyclical process or processes to explain the results of using the HOE method as carried out in this analysis and the similar results found with the ceemdan decompositions.
With the Russian army in tatters, the US Army is turning its attention to China…..
“The US Army needs tanks to win a war in the Pacific, but it knows the Abrams isn’t the right tank for the job”
“The 70-ton Abrams is designed to fight on the plains of Europe, not the jungles and remote islands of the Pacific.”
https://www.businessinsider.com/army-knows-abrams-tanks-arent-suited-for-russia-china-war-2023-11
Joshua,
They aren’t calling for the removal of Netanyahu, they are calling for the removal or Israel. The RW and Hamas agree on what Hamas wants.
.
There is nothing wrong with introspection on the Israeli side, it is another thing entirely to just ignore what is effectively a death cult and a wide open admission that Hamas sacrifices their own citizens toward the cause of the complete elimination of Israel.
.
What is hard to reconcile is calls for a humanitarian cease fire while not denouncing or taking any steps to reverse the official policy of Gaza.
.
I’m open to the argument most people would prefer bombs not being dropped in their neighborhood but those people need better representatives as a prerequisite to accomplishing that goal.
The RWers in the government in Israel are on record for years with policies to boost Hamas, because in doing so they undermine any viability of a two-state solution, because that in turn fits with political expediency.
.
I’m not particularly interested in trying to parse a moral hierarchy as I see both governments as indefensible in their partnership of violent equilibrium, and I see zero utility in making any comparisons. But of course you’re entitled to do so if you see some benefit.
Joshua,
Are you addressing anyone in particular?
[Edit: Oh, sorry. I don’t know how I missed Tom’s comment.]
Mark –
.
Yes, Tom’s comments. Sorry I didn’t put his name at the top.
Ha, Sue the Bastards! That’ll learn em.
“Calling all students dealing with Jew-hated and anti-Israel bullshit on your campuses.
The law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has teamed up with the ADL, Hillel International and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law to launch a legal helpline for students and teachers who experience antisemitism on campus.
If you’ve experienced antisemitic discrimination, intimidation, harassment, vandalism, or violence look up the Campus Antisemitism Legal Line (CALL).”
There is definitely no utility in trying to sustain moral equivalency when the facts don’t support your argument.
SteveF- after last missive I agree – I will stop wasting time. I should know by now.
(Comment #226479)
Suing a well endowed college on behalf of a group of wronged Jewish students and faculty is meat and potatoes for a contingency law firm. I’m surprised it took this long to get started.
Tom –
.
> There is definitely no utility in trying to sustain moral equivalency when the facts don’t support your argument..
.
I take it from that, you see a utility in talking (on and on) about why Hamas is morally inferior to the Israeli government.
.
What is the practical utility you see in doing so?
.
From my perspective there is zero utility with respect to what I see as the desired goal. Instead, we have governments locked in, over decades, with each claiming moral superiority as a way to justify their ongoing policies and existence, but with very little success in resolving the conflict. I can understand why each side would do so. They’re both deeply traumatized communities rooted in an identity/history/identity tied to victimization.
.
So what are the facts that disprove my argument? What facts show the utility of parsing the moral hierarchy when comparing Hamas and the RW Israeli government?
By the letter of the law but not exactly true. The Republican majority passed a 6-week law in 2019. It was stayed as unconstitutional until after Roe Vs Wade was overturned in 2022 after which the state attorney filed a federal case overnight to have the stay lifted. It was in effect for about 82 days last year, during which the infamous 10-year-old traveled to Indiana to have an abortion. A local circuit court placed a temporary stay in sept 2022 followed by an injunction which left the previous 22 week law in effect. That injunction was before the OH supreme court but is now a moot point. So yes OH permitted abortions until 22 weeks on election day. But there was one of the extreme six week bans just waiting on a ruling to go in effect.
Basically, the republicans went for an extreme measure to limit abortions and ended up with something slightly extreme the other way. Their overreach was compounded by attempting to change the rules by placing an emergency issue in the August ballot to make voter-initiated amendments harder, near impossible in fact, breaking their own rules to do so. Just be glad it was on the ballot this year and not in the presidential election or one at which the legislators here up for re-election.
I hope people are reading what Ken Fritsch is saying.
I have removed a lot of his maths explanations leaving the gist.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226415)
“ I was able to analyze the GMST and atmospheric CO2 concentrations 1979-2022 using differencing and series decomposition with the ceemdan function in R.
After smoothing, I could obtain cross correlations with a GMST lag of 9 months at an r=0.52 with both methods.
the lag agrees in direction with that found in the HOE paper”
–
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226425)re SteveF (Comment #226423)
Steve, I knew going in that there are two different processes that have different lags for GMST and CO2 and was looking for a simple way to show that empirically.
I just felt that being able to put reasonable confidence intervals on the HOE process-derived cross correlations and show that the differenced GMST and CO2 series inputs have no trend and are cyclical might accomplish my mission.*
Doing cross correlations on near straight line trends like those of GMST and CO2 for the period 1979-2022 will not show any lags even when intentionally offset – but of course we already know that increased CO2 (and the GHG equivalent) concentrations in the atmosphere cause most of the unnatural GMST increases.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226473)
November 8th, 2023 at 11:59 am
In my spare time I did some cross-correlations using the monthly global mean surface temperature (GMST) and atmospheric CO2 concentrations (CO2) over the period 1979-2022.
I analyzed the data by two methods with the first involving an attempt to reproduce the differencing analysis in the HOE paper and the second (CEEMDAN) to decompose both series into 9 individual components that included a trend.
I used the ccf function in R for observing the lag factor and, in addition, what the plots could reveal about the structure of the series being cross correlated.
The main thrust of my analysis resides in the visual comparisons of the cross- correlation plots plus finding significant lagged correlations and what that might suggest.
For the HOE method the cross-correlation showed a pattern with repeating peaks and valleys indicating the correlated series had a repeating cyclical character. The main lag nearest zero lag was at -10 with a positive correlation of r=0.54. The lags here are reported for temperature which means in the above case temperature peaks at lag -10 months preceded CO2 peaks as was found in HOE.
–
The cross-correlation plot showed a pattern strongly suggestive of a cyclical series and not unlike that of the ENSO series.
That pattern would take the differenced series out of the realm of trends and what would be expected to explain the temperature increase from GHGs.
–
To obtain more understanding of what the cross correlation means and to quantify the results, I did ceemdan decompositions on both series using both CO2 and log of CO2.
I found a lagged correlation from the decomposition method, the results compared well with those of the differencing method.
The cross correlation plot was similar to that using HOE differencing.
The major peak nearest to zero lag was at -10 and the lagged correlation was 0.53 with confidence intervals: 95% [0.45, 0.61]. It is important to note that the component CO2 and temperature series were cyclical, did not have trends and had amplitudes much smaller than the trend.
I know * that the ENSO changes can affect the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. It would be interesting to find a cyclical process or processes to explain the results of using the HOE method as carried out in this analysis and the similar results found with the ceemdan decompositions.
Observations.
A lot of people do not want to believe that CO2 lags temperature.
Ken and SteveF have stated this forcibly and repeatedly.
Yet Ken shows that the HOE paper is seemingly correct.
That at short time intervals the CO2 lags the temperature by 9- 10 months.
Ken had both a mission and a belief ( his statements marked with *)
Lucia has a similar mission re the maths.
It will be interesting to see if she concurs with Ken and the HOE paper with her own methods.
The perfectly rational explanation could include that CO2 cannot therefore be the cause of the temperature rise.”
–
I apologise if I have either misinterpreted Ken or put words into his mouth that he did not say and has not said by my abbreviations and observations. I have already upset him and others enough.
Never my intention.
Science dies in darkness.
Misunderstandings on my part are cleared up by pointing out which parts of atmospheric dynamics as espoused by the worlds leading UAH satellite climate observer and scientist (Roy Spencer) are wrong.
Andrew P (Comment #226485),
Excellent point. I stand corrected.
There is a piece of widely accepted conventional wisdom that I do not understand. Maybe somebody can explain it to me. It is widely assumed that Biden can not step aside, either as President or a candidate, because that would result in Kamala Harris taking his place and that would be unacceptable.
.
I get that Harris is dumb, lazy, inarticulate, and a left wing ideologue with poor judgement. She is a bad joke and is manifestly unqualified to be President. What I don’t get is that Biden has all those “qualities” and is senile and demonstrably corrupt to boot. So why would Harris be worse than Biden, either as President or as a candidate? Real question.
Mike,
Maybe it’s because they fear she wouldn’t win? So as candidate I can understand why supporters might not want Joe to step aside. After all, better Kamala than Trump in the eyes of Biden supporters, wouldn’t you think? I do anyway.
Ken Fritsch,
How can you tell the difference between CO2 lagging temperature by 9 months and temperature lagging CO2 by 3 months? I think you can’t.
mark bofill (Comment #226489): “Maybe it’s because they fear she wouldn’t win?”
.
But why would she have less chance than Biden? If they can produce votes for Biden, they could produce votes for a yellow dog.
Mike,
It might be irrational, but I suspect that it’s predicting the future based on past performance. After all, Biden defeated Trump in 2020.
Vivek just called Haley “Dick Chaney in 3 inch heels”.
.
So far, the the debate is pretty good.
Crap! I’m missing the debate!
In cross correlation you keep one of the variables series in place and move the other variable series such that you have positive and negative lags to the in place series. You look for main peak of correlations between the series and note the lag of the moving series – which can be negative or positive.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226495):”which can be negative or positive”.
.
And there is no way to tell whether it is positive or negative. Unlike what angech is claiming.
That was different. By far the most orderly debate. The questions did not seem to draw out differences between the candidates. Overall, I thought the Republican Party looked good.
Mike
yup.
Joshua,
Hamas clearly needs to go in order for there to be any peace deal. Perhaps so does Netanyahu but there is at least a legal process for that to occur instead of a military one. The anti-Israel / Arab position wants a cease fire which leaves Hamas in place. This will not work.
Vivek Ramaswamy is “scum”, ha ha. He deserved that one. He may not survive that.
Russia’s military hardware and spare part situation is so dire that Moscow is begging around the world to send their hardware back. [Pakistan, Egypt, Belarus and Brazil, that we know of]
I wonder what medium of exchange Russia will offer to buy back weapons it sold.
WSJ, Yesterday:
“Russia has sought to retrieve parts from defense systems it had exported to countries such as Pakistan, Egypt, Belarus and Brazil, as it tries to replenish the enormous stocks of weapons being expended for the war in Ukraine.”
“Russia spent decades building its arms trade,” said a person with knowledge of the buybacks. “Now they’re going back in secret to their customers trying to buy back what they sold them.”
Free [I think] link to the article.
https://www.wsj.com/world/russia-turns-to-longtime-arms-customers-to-boost-war-arsenal-5111bac4?reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Joshua,
The RW in israel wants to destroy Hamas, not build it up. The tanks, bombs targeting Hamas, and the Israeli troops fighting in Gaza, describe the Israeli position on Hamas a lot more clearly than your speculations about motives. BTW, the moral equivalency argument, which you make endlessly (while claiming not to make it!), is beyond tiresome.
Why isn’t Chris Christie doing better? Is bridgegate really that well known such that it could be dragging him down?
Mike M. (Comment #226496)
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226495):”which can be negative or positive”.
.And there is no way to tell whether it is positive or negative. Unlike what angech is claiming.
–
Mike M. The paper originally being discussed is on causuality and a method/s to determine it.
Claiming something is negative or positive means you have a way to tell if it is positive or negative.
Not that there is no way to tell.
–
I know this hurts.
I did not make the claim.
The causuality paper made the claim.
Ken appears to say that the evidence examined mathematically in two ways may be weakly supportive of that claim.
–
Ken’s full quote was “ You look for main peak of correlations between the series and note the lag of the moving series – which can be negative or positive.”
–
If you had read Ken’s previous comments you would notice that he mentions a 9 month lag and a 10 month lag evident for temperature going up before CO2 rises.
That I take to mean is it shows a positive correlation.
One that you can notice and tell.
–
Ken puts a lot of caveats in.
He does not say it is a strong positive correlation (weak actually) but he admits that it exists.
He says that both temperature and CO2 are going up together.
He does not say that CO2 is capable of giving a weak or strong positive signal , ie CO2 preceding temperature.
Temperature does not lag CO2.
–
Causality and Climate (the post at Judy Curry’s blog) explains their method in detail.
It may lack either rigor or reproducibility or rectitude but it makes the claim of being able to detect faux causuality.
–
Ken is not only free to confirm or deny the meanings of his posts he is the only one who can do so.
–
“The lags here are reported for temperature which means in the above case temperature peaks at lag -10 months preceded CO2 peaks as was found in HOE.”
“I found a lagged correlation from the decomposition method, the results compared well with those of the differencing for both CO2 and temperature.”
–
It certainly sounds walks and waddles like a tellable positive correlation in the English vernacular, agreed?
J D Vance gets part if it right: https://twitter.com/JDVance1/status/1722311695140298978
.
But he is remarkably blind to the political reality facing those adamantly opposed to abortion: they are going to lose every time unless they stop the threats of banning abortion.
MikeM, you definitely can determine whether the lag is negative or positive.
It is well known that for some processes temperature increases can cause increases (and decreases) in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere – that are very small over time compared to the trend caused by human emitted CO2 and CO2 equivalents. My analysis is in agreement with this proposition. It reveals no new knowledge, but rather puts it in more direct terms. It contradicts the claims of Demetris Koutsoyiannis where he extrapolated what he reported to the trend in GMST and CO2 in the recent historical period.
CNN, AP, and Reuters had freelance journalists embedded with the Hamas terrorists when they went into Israel on October 7. I saw this yesterday and didn’t believe it because I didn’t know the source. Today CNN has fired the journalist.
“On October 7, Hamas terrorists were not the only ones who documented the war crimes they had committed during their deadly rampage across southern Israel. Some of their atrocities were captured by Gaza-based photojournalists working for the Associated Press and Reuters news agencies whose early morning presence at the breached border area raises serious ethical questions.”
https://honestreporting.com/photographers-without-borders-ap-reuters-pictures-of-hamas-atrocities-raise-ethical-questions/
SteveF –
.
The Isreali (RW) government officials are on record describing their policies to support Hamas. Obviously, the explicit intent was not to enhance their ability to slaughter Israeli civilians, per se. The explicit intent was to triangulate Hamas and the PA, with the effect of disempowering the PA, so as to undermine any potential progress towards a Palestinian state (as a part of a two-state solution). However, only a fool would not realize that assisting in the channeling millions of dollars to Hamas (through Qatar) would enhance Hamas’ military capacity. Certainly the RWers in the Israeli government knew this. Thus, I consider their actions as immoral.
.
Further, there were other elements in the policies of the RWers in the Israeli government that clearly aligned with the policy of boosting Hamas relative to the PA. Specifically, the policies that allowed for and in many ways supported settlements in the West Bank. The further establishment of such policies had two main benefits, the one in service of the other. One benefit is that with further establishment of those settlements any potential progress towards a two-state settlement would be further retarded. Such settlements would either make a resolution unacceptable for Palestinians because they would necessitate giving more land to Israeli settlers, or dismantling settlements which would be unacceptable to Israeli RWers and the religiously fanatical settlers. The second, overriding benefit is one of political expediency. By implementing such policies, the RWers in the government can gain political support from the religious zealot and ultranationalist voting blocks. The more imperiled Bibi’s political (and legal) future, the more he concentrates his policies to please those constituencies.
.
> BTW, the moral equivalency argument, which you make endlessly (while claiming not to make it!)
.
Looking aside your mind-reading capacities and accusation that I’m a liar, I’m curious to know how (in your view) I’m making a moral equivalency argument. What is that I have said that shows you that I’m saying that Israel and Hamas are moral equivalents?
.
I’ll repeat my view. Both Hamas and the Israeli governments have undertaken immoral acts, in my view. But I don’t know how to measure their relative levels of immorality. I don’t see it as a comparison, but a case where both have justified immoral acts on the basis of claiming the moral high ground. It’s not that Hamas has conducted immoral acts BUT Israel had done so also. It’s that Hamas has conducted immoral acts AND Israel has done so also. To add to that, while I think that while both Hamas and the Israeli government have engaged in acts, conducting immoral acts does not in and of itself mean that all members of each government can monolithically be defined as immoral people, imo. People conduct acts I see as immoral because they’re filled with hatred and fear of extermination and desire for vengeance. But they also love their children and their families and friends and commit highly moral acts during the course of their lives. They see their actions as rooted within a moral framework, as do I see my actions.
.
I think the tendency to find white hats and black hats has no utility. It’s a function of the fundamental attribution theory and doesn’t lead to progress. I think progress in this situation will only happen to the extent that people move on from trying to justify immoral acts on their own side by constructing narratives that elevate the morality of their side relative to the other. There’s is no justification for the immoral acts taking place in both sides, imo. None. Understanding why they occur is necessary, imo, for progress towards resolution but such understanding is not justification.
.
To assess the equivalency or lack thereof of each side respectively, I would have to have some clear quantification of “morality” on each side in some coherent sense. I don’t know of a moral equation for how to balance moral acts against immoral acts to reach some determination. Of course I have a visceral response that deliberately killing babies and gang-raping women and murdering fathers in front of their sons *feels* more morally depraved and repugnant than cutting off water and electricity to a million children or for the sake of political expediency enacting policies that result in prolonged suffering of millions of civilians over decades. But when I think about it beyond a *feeling* level I don’t know how to create some kind of mathematical framework for evaluating quantities of morality for the sake of comparison.
Here’s an interview with a retired Israeli general (to the left of Bibi) who received notice for rescuing civilians from the Hamas massacre. At around 13 minutes in he briefly touches on Bibi’s policies re boosting Hamas. You can nite that it’s possible to believe in the strategic goal of bibi’s government towards “destroying Hamas” and still recognize that Bibi’s policies of boosting Hamas were a tragic mistake as well as immoral.
.
https://youtu.be/icC3MU3LhsM?si=ZrEBMnPaqHUMzA6o
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226506): “you definitely can determine whether the lag is negative or positive.”
.
How? Real question.
.
Was the rest of your comment meant to address that? If so, it seems that you have started with an assumption abot sequence, not gotten it from the data.
john ferguson (Comment #226503): “Why isn’t Chris Christie doing better?”
.
Because he is an Establishment Republican who is out of step with 80% of the party and is openly scornful of his opponents who are not out of step.
Here is a link to the about/FAQ page of an organization of former Israeli IDF members who have testified about immoral acts they and their fellow IDF members engaged in during their service. They reference “morality” numerous times. I don’t think I so doing, they are in any way justifying the morality of Hamas.
.
They don’t speak specifically to whether they can parse out a moral equation on the two sides. I would suppose that if they did balance such an equation it would favor the morality of Israelis. It night be an interesting question to ask although I think there would be zero utility in finding out the answer. I can’t see how that answer would, in any way, change or color their advocacy.
.
https://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/about/qa
All the international media are using “freelancers” in Gaza. These are basically Palestinians who live there. They are controlled by Hamas to differing levels that are hard to specifically decode. The media will admit they have restrictions when pressed.
.
For example there have been approx. zero pictures of people holding weapons in Gaza in the MSM, or fighting age males injured or dead from airstrikes. Women and children only. If you want to work there you need to adhere to the rules which don’t even have to be stated out loud. It’s mostly self censoring at this point.
MikeM, it is a very simple task to determine whether the GMST series lags CO2 or the reverse occurs when using the ccf function in R. If GMST lags CO2 it means that the temperature increase proceeds the CO2 increase. Again the lag is determined in this case by holding the CO2 series in place timewise while the GMST series is moved relative to the CO2 series by one month at a time both forwards and backwards and then determining where (the lag) peak correlation occurs between the series. In this case a negative lag showed that GMST increases preceeded CO2 increases. It was increases because the lag showed a positive correlation. If the lag found in this manner was positive and the correlation were positive it would mean the increases in CO2 preceeded the increases in GMST.
If you need further explanations go the the R function ccf and read about what it does or better play with with some simple like a sine response.
I should also note here that the correlation is calculated using the intersection of the two series. In R that is found using the function ts.intersect.
A * government * whose explicit admitted intent/policy and actions are to target, take hostage, and murder civilians and has demonstrated callous disregard for the safety of their own citizens isn’t going to win a western based morality tradeoff. They might win a martyrdom to eliminate Israel morality tradeoff.
.
The existence of anecdotal atrocities isn’t that meaningful, these will happen in all wars as we have seen in Ukraine from both sides. A difference is whether this is government policy, tolerated (or even celebrated) by the citizens, and whether people committing atrocities are ever held accountable. Certainly most things that happen in wars are never prosecuted, but there are different value systems at play here that can be judged.
.
The behavior of one side is completely ignored here as far as their moral culpability nor do they have any agency in this representation. The other side has both complete agency and the responsibility to morally control their opponent’s actions somehow. It’s not coherent.
.
One can be confident that any moral balancing equation constructed on Oct 6th would have included a rather large deduction for the events of Oct 7th and stated government policy since then. This is simply being ignored, a rounding error, which is just multiplying by zero and adding in the desired pre-Oct 7th answer.
I suspect that partisan politics play the same part in Israel as they do in the US where a war under a Democrat president is a good and moral one as proclaimed by Democrats and their supporters and bad by proclamation of most of the Republicans and their supporters. Of course, the reversed partisan situation is the same.
Like all government emergencies, in war much more emotion and political pandering than reason goes into government responses. Some emergencies and wars require more bipartisan support and that often invokes even less forethought and reason.
War is not a reasonable proposition and thus it is not unexpected that discussions of it are not filled with reason and avoidance of emotion.
Blame for wars are what historians think it is – and often get wrong. They tend to see wars through partisan eyes
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226513),
But both series are periodic with a period of 12 months. So any of the following lags should give essentially the same result:
… -15, -3, +9, +21, …
I don’t see how it can be possible to distinguish between them.
Battle Bots, US Navy enters the drone wars…. Finally!
‘Autonomous Warrior’ Exercise
US Navy and Australian Navy robots playing wargames at sea.
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2023/11/8/us-and-australian-navies-practice-autonomy
“Navy Surface Drone Fires Its First Missile During Middle East Exercise”
https://www.realcleardefense.com/2023/11/08/navy_surface_drone_fires_its_first_missile_during_middle_east_exercise_991397.html
Mike, the periods I see from ceemdan decomposition are closer to 40 months as I recall. You are correct that a repeating cross correlation response will occur with a cyclical and periodically series, but the response (r) closest to zero lag was by far the greatest. It is easy to see this with 2 identified sine series that are offset (lagged) from one another by a given amount in the positive and negative directions. You can do this in R with the function ccf and looking at the resulting plot.
The repeating pattern seen in my analysis of the differences series is what led me to propose a cyclical and periodic process.
Manchin not seeking re-election in WV for 2024, that is pretty much a guaranteed flip for Republicans. Manchin was basically half-Republican anyway so maybe half a seat.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226518): “the periods I see from ceemdan decomposition are closer to 40 months”
.
So you are not looking at the seasonal variation? Have you removed seasonality from the CO2 data? Is the lag determined from some other events in the data set? El Nino, maybe?
Tom –
.
> A * government * whose explicit admitted intent/policy and actions are to target, take hostage, and murder civilians and has demonstrated callous disregard for the safety of their own citizens isn’t going to win a western based morality tradeoff
.
I, for one, am not identifying a winner (or loser). I can’t tell if you’re suggesting I was, but I wasn’t, although as near as I can tell SteveF thinks I was..
MikeM, the decomposition method removes the seasonality and differencing by month is from month in one year to the next year. The lag that I see has not been identified for cause. Its cycle looks similar to that of the ENSO index, but the paper I linked above indicated that the positive phase of the ENSO cycle can retard increases in CO2 atmospheric concentration.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226506)
“MikeM, you definitely can determine whether the lag is negative or positive.”
–
“It is well known that for some processes temperature increases can cause increases (and decreases) in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere – that are very small over time compared to the trend caused by human emitted CO2 and CO2 equivalents. My analysis is in agreement with this proposition.”
–
Not sure why he wishes to put the caveat (and decreases) in here.
Quibbles aside increasing the temperature causes more CO2 to come out of the oceans and out of solutions, not less.
One of the bedrock beliefs of AGW is that if CO2 is a cause it will increase temp and in theory cause a runaway effect.
It reveals no new knowledge, but rather puts it in more direct terms. It contradicts the claims of Demetris Koutsoyiannis where he extrapolated what he reported to the trend in GMST and CO2 in the recent historical period.
–
Again he says this effect is real but unimportant as he firmly believes CO2 addition over 40 years can cause global warming but not CO2 from volcanoes over a thousand years which would have given twice the global warming effect.
Whatever removes the CO2 from the atmosphere is the same mechanism ( has to be) but it only works and has been shown to work for volcanoes over thousands of yards.
Of course the mechanism might detect isotopic differences and be programmed to detect and only remove volcanic, not human CO2.
<Sarc to emphasise this very important point.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #226522): “The lag that I see has not been identified for cause. Its cycle looks similar to that of the ENSO index”.
.
Thanks. That is very different from what I thought you were doing. Not a periodic process, so you can determine which parameter leads the other. El Nino is known to produce a global increase in T. If you detrend and deseasonalize, then El Nino and AMO linked effects should be the main variation in T. And El Nino also has an impact on CO2.
Mike M,
Exactly right, ENSO jumps out as driving short term changes in average temperature. It is even more clear when ENSO (for example Nino 3,4) with some lag is correlated with tropical average temperature (+/- 30 degrees latitude) rather than global. Northern hemisphere temperatures, especially in winter months, add a big part of the total noise in the de-seasonalized temperature.
Bari Weiss is unhappy about the poison spread by ‘DEI’:https://www.thefp.com/p/end-dei-woke-capture
.
And poison it is.
Is the delete button a new feature?
Appreciated and used anyway today.
So as no to be too sarcastic about ENSO temp causing CO2 levels to go up.
I wonder why it is so hard to find a graph of daily (24 hour) CO2 levels.
Over oceans.
Almost like everyone pretends it does not change at night when the sun goes down.
Except for the effect on fish tank alkalinity
Steve,
It will be a long time mending. The philosophical damage inflicted on human thought in the 20’th century has not been corrected and in fact will continue to manifest such destructive nonsense going forward until it is corrected. Perhaps we will have to wait for the death of the university and see what rises in its place. We’re old here, it’s not going to happen in our remaining lifetimes.
ENSO temperature variations on CO2 concentrations are not as simple as higher temperatures increasing CO2 concentrations. There are several other processes involved as discussed in the linked article in one of my previous posts on this topic. When I did some rough cross correlation analyses with the ENSO index and cyclical components of the decomposition of the atmospheric CO2 concentrations, the correlations were negative.
This finding, if it held up under more refined analyses, would put it counter to what my analyses, using differencing and decomposition of the GMST and atmospheric CO2 series, found and is reason to think that the results of my analyses do not involve the ENSO cycle.
mark bofill,
No, not in our lifetimes. There is a corps of ‘social justice’ warriors in so many positions of power that it will be a least a generation before the insanity ends. The best we can do is resist the worst of the lunacy, and vote for people who are not obviously crazy about ‘systemic racism’ and the like. Depressing.
Ken Frisch,
I only ever looked at temperature not CO2 variation.
I was surprised how little screaming there actually was when DeSantis dismantled DEI in the public university system in FL. The usual suspects said the usual things, but it appears this implementation of equity is deeply unpopular across the board.
.
Defund the police was similar, when the extremes take over it threatens the entire movement. Perhaps the right might learn a lesson here about abortion, but I doubt it, ha ha.
Joshua,
I get it, you want to be neutral on the morality. Declaring who is the “worstest” isn’t very productive in finding a solution most of the time and generally just increases hostility further. I would argue in this case that there is a threshold for removing one side politically, and maybe even both. I think you will easily get your wish of Netanyahu being removed, he was in charge when this happened and he will not survive that. He was already low on political capital.
As for defund the police, the number of people shot and killed by police has barely changed. This suggests that the police weren’t actually using bad judgment all along beyond some isolated cases, or at a minimum all the shaming and new training hasn’t changed anything.
.
What did change is body cameras and other surveillance cameras have now cleared up the evidence.
https://www.youtube.com/@PoliceActivity/videos
.
There are hundreds of police shootings here, it’s not pleasant, but if you want to know the reality of this subject, here it is. It’s a mix of clear cases and shaky judgment calls which might have turned out non-lethal. A larger than expected ratio of mental illness as opposed to bad guys.
I see lots of discussion of war tactics and the immediate political and moral issues involved but not the more basic issues of connectivity of nation state government to wars and looking at the more general causes of war.
I see wars as related to the weaknesses of nation state governments whereby elected officials tend to have short time horizons and thus do not deal with issues until the situation becomes an emergency and consequently the situation is handled for political expediency and little forethought.
Prevention of the current situation and that of too much of our history of near continuous wars would require, in my judgment, an entire rethinking of the power over our lives we hand to elected politicians. We allow governments, and especially in crisis situations like wars, to take actions we would deplore and act against in our private world. For example, we would not concede that capturing the perpetrator of the most heniuos crime would allows us the collateral killing of that criminal’s mother and sister.
Avoiding such situations will take forethought that will not come from our politicians and, in my mind, would better arrive in the form of free markets, free trade, free travel and free exchange of ideas across national borders.
If eradicating Hamas, whatever that might mean, is the solution, remember that there was a non-violent protest in Gaza a few years ago led by Abu Artema. It was a mass movement and resulted in 100s of casualties and 1000s of people getting maimed.
https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/78712
Abu Artema is now in critical condition after his family including a young son was killed in an airstrike on his home.
.
The reality is that while Gaza is not of major historical interest, there is a Biblical vision behind reclaiming the lands of Judea and Samaria, even as the hasbara is couched in national security terms. Orthodox Israelis have a higher birth rate and the religious right are 30% of the population as opposed to 10% at founding. The youth in Israel are right wing. There are probably more centrists in the security apparatus. This is increasingly becoming a theocratic state. Removal of Bibi may not change things very much for the foreseeable future. Besides, it is cheaper to live in the occupied territories.
.
As for state-sponsored acts, only 3% of settler violence investigations as documented by Yesh Din have resulted in convictions and many such displacements are done in accompaniment with soldiers. About 95% of the permits filed by Palestinians in the West Bank are denied and their construction can be demolished as being illegal. Perhaps when the Israeli right speaks about the West Bank in Biblical terms, we should take them at their word.
Ken,
While what you say is mostly true it should be noted that war has been pretty much constant but the rate of deaths by war has decreased a great deal since WWII. Note the graph is logarithmic.
https://www.vox.com/2015/6/23/8832311/war-casualties-600-years
.
It can be argued that the next large war could be off the charts.
.
The first and foremost function of (rational) governments is to protect their citizens from external threats. Appearing weak doesn’t work in the long hard path to pack leader so we end up with a lot of strongarm types at the top.
.
There does seem to be a lot of rationalizing external invasions as a solution to a threat to domestic citizens.
Rumor mill on Manchin possibly running for President.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/will-joe-manchin-run-for-president-democrats-fear-a-disaster-c19952ec?st=9b3f0d221ekafrn&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
.
That would doom Biden for sure. Not sure how the rest would pan out with respect to Trump, more than likely a win for Trump I guess. He would be a viable 3rd party candidate.
Tom –
.
> I get it, you want to be neutral on the morality. Declaring who is the “worstest” isn’t very productive in finding a solution most of the time and generally just increases hostility further.
..
Thanks for that.
.
I will acknowledge I have a “philosophical” bias against some kind of “objective” scale for evaluating morality as I see such judgment as often inherently subjective.
.
That said, I also acknowledge that sometimes a ranking of morality is perfectly justifiable. Certainly a situation where bloodthirsty, murderous maniacs derive pleasure from the most cruel acts imaginable would support going in that direction. It’s difficult to imagine anything that could rank lower on any reasonable morality scale.
.
But this stuff is tricky. Policies that are justifiable in one sense but that lead towards unnecessary suffering of millions over decades might be less strikingly ammoral. How is “unnecessary” there evaluated? It’s complicated.
.
Seems to me to evaluate this you need some kind of metric, units of measure. If not, then how is an assessment anything other than subjective and biased? If so then what are they? I don’t know what they’d be and so it doesn’t make sense to me except as an exercise of anger, outrage, frustration. What happened seems unfathomable. Maybe putting a circle wound it makes it easier to comprehend somehow, but as you describe, such categorization (and demonizing people who fall on one side or the other) is often part of what perpetuates conflict.
.
As for Bibi. Yes, it appears that he’s gone. But there’s a non-trivial chance that hell be replaced by someone even more likely to craft polices to appease bloodthirsty Jewish religious fanatics seeking essentially a theocracy.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226539): “That would doom Biden for sure.”
.
I doubt it. Third party votes tend to be “none of the above” or something of that nature. So they normally do not have much of an impact on who wins. People who love Trump or are horrified by him are not likely to vote for Manchin, at least not in a state where the outcome is in doubt. Ditto for people who are happy with Biden or who think it is imperative that he be removed from office. The people who vote for Manchin would mostly be ones who can’t decide whether Trump or Biden is worse or who just can’t bring themselves to vote for either. Maybe they won’t split down the middle, but I don’t see how to predict which way they would split.
Iceland bracing for volcanic eruption. Magma building under Grindavík a town of 3,400 people 25 miles from Reykjavik.
Iceland Met Office posting real time data:
https://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes
Russel… I’ve been away at a competition. I SAW that news! Waiting to see when this blows.
Lucia, welcome back!
Did you remain upright at all times?
Global warming is an amazing phenomenon, it effects everything and the effect is always negative!
“Experts said climate change was influencing the increased seismic activity, with Icelandic Meteorological Institute’s Michelle Parks saying: “The current deglaciation that’s occurring in Iceland is affecting our volcanoes and magma bodies that are residing beneath these volcanoes.”
“So in the future this could mean more frequent or larger eruptions.”
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-11-11/thousands-evacuated-over-iceland-volcano-eruption-fears#:~:text=Experts said climate change was,are residing beneath these volcanoes.
Another in the media genre of “experts fear …”. This tends to mean it is a slow news day, which is basically every day in climate science.
Dear Iceland,
Please rename your volcanoes to something easier to say and spell.
Thank you.
Last night’s post from the Icelandic Met Office:
Reykjanes Volcano
Time: 11. Nov 2023, 19:54 GMT
Color code: Orange
Volcano id: 371020
Activity summary:
At 18:00 today, 11 November, a status meeting concluded between scientists at the Icelandic Meteorological Office, the University of Iceland, and the Department of Civil Protection and Emergency Management. From geophysical models of the dike intrusion, it is estimated that the intrusion is propagating upwards slowly, with magma thought to be 800 m beneath the surface. The exact location of a possible eruption site is unknown, but the 15-km length and orientation of the dike gives a good indication of possible sources. The overall assessment from the status meeting was that the likelihood of a volcanic eruption is high, and that an eruption could be possible on a timescale of just days. Based on the extent of the dike, magma could emerge from its southern, just outside of Grindavik. Therefore, the likelihood of a submarine eruption has also increased, so preparations must be made for the possibility of explosive activity. The aviation color code remains at orange for the increased likelihood of an eruption.
Cloud height:
No eruption ongoing.
Other cloud information:
No eruption ongoing.
Remarks:
An explosive eruption occurring offshore would produce ash and, in the worst case, it could produce an ash cloud up to 15 km a.s.l. More information on background activity, eruptive scenarios and volcanic hazards is available at icelandicvolcanoes.is/?volcano=REY.
Link:
https://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/volcanoes/vona-notifications/?nr=484
Looks like the Ukraine is screwed: https://compactmag.com/article/a-bitter-vindication-for-ukraine-doves
.
Can the Biden administration change policies to reflect reality on the ground? I doubt it, they are simply fools… and worse. Or as some have noted: being an enemy of the USA is bad; being a friend can be worse. Best it seems is to be neither friend nor enemy.
More of the same from the Icelandic Met Office:
“Significant likelihood of a volcanic eruption in the coming days. Around 1000 earthquakes within the dyke boundaries from midnight. Models show a 15-km long magma intrusion, located just northwest of Grindavík.
GPS measurements covering the past 24 hours show that deformation associated with the dyke intrusion that formed on Friday, November 10th has slowed. This can be an indication that magma is moving closer to the surface, new models will be run as soon as new data comes in to update the model.”
https://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes
Cashing in$
Gotta love them Icelanders… Cashing in on the rumors of a volcano. For example, a YouTube live channel that’s become a cash cow:
https://www.youtube.com/live/804nPrAUAxg?si=dWRRMp8fTcNr1ioz
“Live from Iceland”, 36.8K subscribers, watching now 4,740 people, Started streaming on Nov 8, 2023
Home page with more live cams: https://livefromiceland.is/
And big increase in Volcano Tourisn ads:
https://youtu.be/NXgfhtSeegY?si=eZnOjKyNlr5aLMFm
Avdiivka direction, Work of the 47th Brigade
The frequency of posts of drone videos of Russian columns attacking and getting shredded has decreased. I don’t know if that means there are fewer attacks or if it means something else. Today we have one [caution it’s not a pretty sight]:
https://x.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1723940431581385093?s=20
And then there were four alternatives to Trump among Republicans: Tim Scott ends his campaign.
.
Now if a ‘weighty’ former governor and a former tech entrepreneur would do the same, one of the remaining two might actually get close to Trump in the first few primaries.
.
Since Nikki! is a female version of Jeb!, she is part of the problem in Washington, not part of the solution; I think Trump will crush her in most states.
.
DeSantis has the anchor of a politically unwise “heartbeat” law around his neck, and that could sink him in a general election, but it may not hurt him in the primaries. IMO, that heartbeat law in Florida was the biggest political error I have seen in many years. Florida had a perfectly reasonable compromise abortion law on the books (15 week limit, exceptions for rape, incest, and maternal health). Nobody was completely happy, but relatively few were in a rage, and DeSantis had nothing to worry about on abortion. Now ~2/3 of voters won’t ever again trust his judgement on abortion, and if he is the nominee, Democrats will pound him on abortion 24/7. That law was a big mistake.
German politicians are pushing to double their financial support for the Ukraine, from $4 billion this year to $8 billion next year. Passage of that legislation looks uncertain.
.
To put German support in perspective: on the basis of GDP, to match US support for the Ukraine this year, Germany would have had to spend over $10 billion, not $4 billion. The Europeans seem, as always, unwilling to have their expenditures match their propaganda.
SteveF,
I cannot see the Jeb in Nikki. She seems much more forceful and alert.
.
I was amused to see DeSantis suggest that a proposal he was unsympathetic to was “flat-footed”.
.
Maybe it needed a bit more lift.
I’m liking Nikki Haley. Jim likes Niki Haley. Not sure what she in particular she supposedly has in common with Jeb, or Dick Cheney.
.
And the 5 inch heels are a good thing.
john ferguson (Comment #226554): “I cannot see the Jeb in Nikki. She seems much more forceful and alert.”
.
She is not Jeb in style. She is Jeb in substance.
“The Ukraine” is incorrect. It is “Ukraine”.
.
It is incorrect the use “the” in front of the name of a country unless:
(1) The name is plural (the Netherlands, the Philippines, the United States).
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/geographical-use-the/
(2) The name includes a noun and a modifier: (the United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland).
.
“The” typically refers to a geographic region (the Midwest).
.
Ukrainians can get touchy on the point since there is a long history of Russia (tsarist, communist, or authoritarian) using the Russian equivalent of “the Ukraine” as part of propaganda insisting that there was no such thing as Ukrainians living in a country called Ukraine, they were Russians living in a region of Russia called the Ukraine. Many Ukrainians were murdered or sent to Siberia for insisting otherwise.
Looking for recommendations from anyone for TV series from the BBC. We added BritBox streaming service to watch one BBC TV series, The Mallorca Files, and we are halfway through it and looking for what’s next.
Mallorca Files is a thumbs up….. Detective show filmed on the Spanish island with two cops, one from Scotland Yard and one from Germany. You can watch it for $8.99/month [one-week free trial] on BritBox or free with commercials [too many!] on Amazon’s Freevee. Trailer:
https://youtu.be/us_qS3OgwDQ?si=UxGNPTqFX1_PoDZ6
MikeM
It was Jeb’s style that resulted in his being ignored by voters. Usually that’s what people are referring too when they slam people as like Jeb. I agree with you she does not share Jeb’s style.
If someone wants to say her policies are like his as a short hand, ok. But I guess I’d rather just hear what her policy is and why you don’t like it. Still this is what I gather about Jeb’s policies (rathern than his laconic demeanor.)
When he was running:
Not being psychic, Jeb had no specific position on the current ( 2023) hot war in Ukraine or Hamas Oct 7 strike on Israel, nor what to do about it in current position.
.
Jebs abortion position was to ban abortions after 20 weeks. Nikki’s is to leave it to the states– the way SCOTUS has. Not sure what Jeb’s position would have become after the SCOTUS ruling.
.
Jeb opposed tax increases.
.
Jeb wanted to strengthen ties with Israel, and cancel nuclear deal with Iran.
.
Jeb with respect to Russia, he wanted to consider putting troops in “region”. In retrospect, that might have staved off the current problem of a hot war.
.
Jeb thought Putin was a bully– he’s right.
This is from pbs.org:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/jeb-bush-believe-candidate-stands-11-issues
Not voting for Vivek. Nope. No way. Done.
“It’s ‘Ukraine,’ not ‘the Ukraine’ – here’s why”
…more from a linguistic anthropologist:
https://theconversation.com/its-ukraine-not-the-ukraine-heres-why-178748
Haley’s weakness / difference is she is a foreign policy hawk, very aggressive. So was Clinton. Perhaps this is what we will get for women politicians for a while, needing to prove their bonafides in a previous man’s world. Protect the herd.
.
DeSantis and Haley need to team up. They can call it a co-presidency if they like. The reason I like DeSantis is because he is a doer instead of continuous bluster. You can judge him by what he does. This tends to be a liability in US politics though.
I found this entertaining from a few days ago.
NYT: Before World Leaders Arrive, San Francisco Races to Clean Up
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference comes at a pivotal moment for the city as it struggles to rebound from the pandemic.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/us/san-francisco-apec-city-clean.html
“San Francisco had the air this week of teenagers frantically cleaning up after a house party with their parents on the way home.”
.
So they will try to cleanup SF for a leader from China, but not for their own residents? I can only imagine the glee Xi will have touring the mecca of progressive governance.
Tom
There. Fixed that.
The Trump crowd is increasingly isolationist, so she will have a hard time peeling those voters off.
Tom,
Sure. I interpreted “weakness” as an suggestion that was actually something wrong about her. Evidently you mean: The feature that will make her less palatable to Trump voters.
.
I get she will be a hard sell to them. But so is everybody. Trump voters want Trump. It’s not clear to me that they all actually give a hoot about “policy”. I know a few around here personally, and honestly, they seem to be for something because Trump is for it. They aren’t for Trump for the majority of his policies and often don’t even know what they are.
.
That’s not true of all Trump supporters, but it’s true of some. The group who are just for Trump because he’s Trump are also going to be p.o’d about DeSantis. Or Ramaswami– no matter how hard he tries to be Trump-lite (what with the name calling, attempts at glib aound bites and blah… blah…)
.
Scotts out– he was to religious for me to love. Was willing to consider him… but….
.
I’m liking Haley. Might not mind DeSantis as her Veep.
Yes, that’s what I meant. No matter what, the US has to at a minimum walk softly and carry a big stick to keep conflicts minimized. If the US abdicates that responsibility then that leaves a void that will be filled by regional players who have had fevered dreams for decades, such as Iran. One can argue that is an OK outcome but I think it will just be more carnage.
.
Personally I’m tired of being the world police. It’s a thankless job, like running the neighborhood HOA. The only thing worse than doing it is not doing it. We could hand it off to the UN or China, ha ha.
.
Trump is a cult of personality like Obama before him. Pretty hard to breakthrough that stuff. Charisma works in US politics. People want to be inspired, and for some reason that is hard to understand certain people have that ability more than others.
Lucia,
“Trump voters want Trump. It’s not clear to me that they all actually give a hoot about “policy”. ”
.
I voted for Trump (holding my nose tightly closed), and I actually give many hoots about many policies. Trump is an asshole, and that obviously will not change. I don’t like Haley as much as DeSantis because Haley seems to me way too gung-ho for endless wars, which are costly and stupid. DeSantis served in Iraq, and saw the results, up close and personal, and I am sure that will influence his thinking about supporting wars. Like Tom Scharf, I am tired of the USA acting as world policeman.
.
That said, I will vote for any Republican instead of Biden.
Tom Scahrf,
Not sure about carrying a big stick, but the USA has handled all it’s interventions stupidly. The goal for misbehavior ought to be: the bad guys pay very dearly, we pay the absolute minimum needed (in blood and treasure). No more trying to build “enlighten Western style democracies” in places where people prefer autocrats and 8th century culture. Let them have what they want, but with the understanding their 8th century atrocities must stay in their own country.
Mike M,
OK, no more inappropriate ‘the’s.
Of all scientists, volcanologists create the coolest graphics:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1724141232706744575?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
Shows gps ground displacement and magma upwelling. In addition, seismic activity is slightly reduced but the evacuation order remains in place.
It’s interesting to see some conservatives making arguments that overlap in some fundamental ways with arguments that some people on the left have been making for decades.
Of course, associated differences remain – the views don’t completely overlap. And of course some on the left have largely reversed course, almost as if there’s a law of motion that governs an equal and opposite reaction in viewpoints along an ideological spectrum.
But what’s unfortunate (IMO) is that there is rarely if ever any recognition of the common ground. Many people tend to be much more interested in the out-group antipathies and in-group sympathies than in mining the potential synergies of agreement.
lucia (Comment #226566): “I get she will be a hard sell to them. But so is everybody. Trump voters want Trump. It’s not clear to me that they all actually give a hoot about “policy”.”
.
I don’t think that is right. There are many different flavors of Trump voters. Only about 20-30% of likely Republican voters say that their mind is made up that they want Trump. For those Trump loyalists, anyone else will be a hard sell. But there is a big block of populist Republicans who are not Trump voters. They could be won over by a candidate who espouses populist policies. But they will be very leery of an Establishment Republican like Haley.
Joshua,
“…there is rarely if ever any recognition of the common ground”
.
What common ground do you see between “conservatives” and “people of the left”? (Not at all rhetorical.) I rather suspect there are more overlaps due to coincidence of consequences than coincidence of objectives. Please tell if you think otherwise.
SteveF,
You are not an “Always Trumper”. I know some. It’s not clear to me they really think about policy.
MikeM
Yes. I should have said some Trump voters. I consider there to be a core that is “Ever Trumper”, or “No one other than Trump”.
There are some Trump voters who will vote for Haley. Jim is one. He will never vote for Trump now and like me prefers Hailley to DeSantis.
Some. Not all.
Lots of people held their nose and voted for Trump because they didn’t want Clinton. I’d suggest not assuming they are all anti-establishment Republicans and leary of Haley. Plenty of pro-establishment Republicans voted for Trump because the didn’t want Clinton or any Democrat in the whitehouse.
lucia (Comment #226576): “Plenty of pro-establishment Republicans voted for Trump because the didn’t want Clinton or any Democrat in the whitehouse.”
.
I agree. We have a miscommunication that is my fault. I wrote: “there is a big block of populist Republicans who are not Trump voters”. I meant to say “not Trump loyalists”. All the populist Republicans, as well as many other Republicans, voted for Trump.
The Republicans at the Federal level will have a tough time getting elected with the abortion legacy issue unless they sort out a policy which balances the issues of absolute freedom of choice v when is abortion murder a bit better.
14 weeks yes as safe medically for the mother.
20 weeks no as baby now technically viable.
14- 20 weeks grudging OK.
–
States foolish enough to ban have to live with the political consequences at home and federally.
–
On a brighter note only a year to go to the next elections and a new twist everyday.
Who would bother watching the Kardashians, Housewives, reality shows or SOAPs when we get free daily entertainment at no ost?
I think the two party system pretty much guarantees that the parties will move around ideologically in order to maintain about half of the vote, at least federally. That’s probably more feature than drawback.
.
My impression is people outside of the US do not see a big difference between the parties. From the outside it is capitalism, democracy, big military, high tech, liberty, high end education. They don’t care about culture wars until we export it to their country.
“only a year to go” … until we start arguing over the 2028 election.
Steve –
.
What prompted that comment of mine was reading your comment about the US not “building Western style democracies.” That was a mainstay argument of the left for decades, the invasion of Iraq in particular and the objections to the arguments of Dick Cheney and PNAC and “American Hegemony.”
.
Just a bit earlier, I had watched this:
.
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1716574971206500570?s=20
.
And thought about how quite a number of the lines of argumentation overlapped with what “the left” has said for decades.
.
Of course, there’s always been the “horseshoe” model for where the more extreme left and extreme right coincide, but beyond that more “extreme” angle I’ve been thinking lately about how many of the arguments I hear coming out of (parts of) “the right” ring similar to arguments I’ve hear from “the left” for decades – arguments about the CIA and FBI, about “free speech,” about “big pharma” about how Russia isn’t the “evil” enemy, about the Military Industrial Complex and about “endless wars,” etc.
.
Of course there are dissimilarities in the details that run through pretty much through all of those issues – but there’s also a lot of common ground, IMO.
.
As for coincidence of consequences being explanatory as opposed to coincidence of objectives, I don’t really understand what you mean. How would that work with respect to say, not thinking it’s wise to spend money on building democracies in the ME or suspicion of “big pharma?”
The Ukraine version of “Game of Thrones” is in full swing.
.
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/wild-day-as-the-ukrainian-game-of?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1351274&post_id=138835575&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=182d3m&utm_medium=email
MikeM
There are also a large block of Republicans who are not populists who voted for Trump in the presidential election. It is simply the case that in the presidential election itself– rather than primaries– the choice was between Clinton and Trump and then Biden and Trump.
.
Lots of Republicans voted for “not the Democrat”. They didn’t all become populists in the process.
.
If you use the term “Trump voter” to mean anyone and everyone who voted for Trump, then you have to face the fact that plenty of them are not Trump supporters and plenty prefer traditional GOP positions to many of Trumps. But they also dis-prefer a many DEM policies.
.
Alternatively, if you interpret “Trump voters” as the subset of Republican’s who are “Only Trumpers” — meaning people who vote for Trump because they actually support Trump, then they mostly are populists.
.
And of course, some people who voted for Trump are in between and like many of Trump’s policies but prefer them embodied in someone other than Trump.
.
Right now, the headlines Say Nikki Haley is rising briskly in polls. DeSantis is ahead. But don’t assume that Haley can’t get there. Maybe she can. Maybe she can’t. We’ll see.
And, of course, Vivek did her a favor with the 3″ heels crack and her come back was great. People she she has presence. They see she’s not afraid to state her positions. I think people are starting to see her as someone who can beat Trump.
.
And independents like her which would be good in a federal election. (And in Illinois, we decide which party ballot to take on the day of the primary. Independents can go in an vote to nominate her. I don’t know what happens in other states.)
.
It also may turn out Trump doesn’t know how to deal with her calm demeanor and quickness in debate. Hilary would never have come back with they are 5″ heels. DeSantis has a tendency to look sour and pissed off if attacked. Haley is shining right now.
My political philosophy is most definitely “Jacksonian”.
.
I support Trump mainly for “No Clinton and No Bush” and any of their look alike. None of the candidates in either party meets this test for me.
.
Trump is an assh… at times. So what. As with selecting an attorney to defend you in court, I also want a junkyard dog to support my views in politics.
.
War is politics by other means, meaning also that politics is war by other means.
.
This is a short older article that hits my views pretty well.
.
https://www.hudson.org/domestic-policy/donald-trump-s-jacksonian-revolt
>>As with selecting an attorney to defend you in court, I also want a junkyard dog to support my views in politics.
If selecting an attorney, I want someone who is skilled in the law, presentation and who doesn’t alienate the judge or jury. That’s not a junkyard dog.
.
Trump doesn’t support many of my political views. Obviously, I’m not going to want him compared to people who better align with my views.
Issues smissues! Policies smolicies! I don’t care where any candidate stands on [abortion, Ukraine, deficit, you name it]. I will support any Republican who has the moxie to defeat Trump. Everyone fell into his trap. We are debating the relative attributes of the also-rans, none of whom could stand in the mud and go toe-to-toe with Trump. We are doomed.
Ed Forbes,
There could be political upheaval in Ukraine, of course, but the fog of war is thick, and every source of public information is not just unreliable, but willfully misleading. There are not enough grains of salt around to try to figure out the reality. The people who know what is actually happening are never going to tell us. Better to ignore the propaganda I think.
Ed Forbes,
I should add: if Congress refuses to appropriate funding for Ukraine within a few months, it seems unlikely the Europeans, Japanese, and Australians are going to step in to fill the $60 billion funding gap. In which case, no amount of propaganda is going to hide the fact Ukraine will not be able to sustain the current war effort. I hope that back-channel communication with the Russians can work out agreement to a cease-fire before one is publicly proposed. But the Biden administration is so incompetent that it might not be talking with the Russians about a ceasefire.
SteveF
I doubt Ed can follow this advice. No amount of his having been wrong over and over during this war has stopped him from providing insight from his preferred sources.
.
The war is grim. No one ever predicted a Ukraine “win”– and it’s amazing they have held this far even with help. You are certainly correct that they can’t continue with out a huge amount more help.
.
But Ed’s sources have really been way, way, way off. About nearly everything. At some point, I’m sure Ed will say, “See, Ukraine finally sued for peace. My sources were totally right…” Uhmm… nope. They were constantly wrong.
My sources have been nearly impeccable, and have remained steadfast in their bravery. I have not detected even a hint of battle fatigue. Three of my sources are actually in the trenches…. they are just as eager to kill Russians as they have ever been. If they are executing an elaborate hoax, it’s a good one.
Remember the first days of the war when the 100-mile-long column of Russian armor was bearing down on Kyiv? These were the best divisions in the Russian army. Biden offered Zelenskyy safe haven. He replied, “I need bullets, not a ride”. He threw open the armory and the Ukrainian citizens lined up, got their rifles, and headed off to face the Russian tanks. There was only a trickle of US arms at that time. They humiliated the the Russians. He is still leading with that same fearlessness.
Currently, Europe is supplying more arms than the US and Europe really has a dog in this fight. I don’t see them reducing their support. I think the war will continue if the US pulls out.
And finally, never underestimate the political clout of the US arms industry.
Today:
NBC: “Babies die as Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza stops functioning”
WSJ: “Israel Says Hamas Prevented Al-Shifa Hospital From Receiving Fuel”
Reuters: “Lives of 36 babies in Gaza hospital at risk despite Israeli incubator offer”
.
NBC, 34 days ago: “Gaza hospitals face a ‘tsunami of wounded’ as supplies and power run out”
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/gaza-hospitals-airstrikes-children-supplies-power-rcna119877
“The World Health Organization said Tuesday it is expected that fuel will run out in a matter of days.”
“A man brings an injured baby into Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza following an Israeli airstrike Wednesday.”
.
So according to NBC fuel finally ran out at Al Shifa hospital the day Israel showed up at the gates and the babies died, the hospital then refused fuel and battery powered incubators from Israel. NBC and the usual suspects have been reporting daily for over a month that fuel was going to run out within a day. Something seems a bit off here.
.
I realize this is the fog of war but I do expect the media to be at a minimum self-aware that their previous reporting was basically propaganda, and the current information may be as well.
.
The WHO and UN have been on the ground in Gaza for decades providing basic services. Most of the people who work for them are Palestinian. There is a more than zero chance they are just repeating Hamas propaganda and shouldn’t be taken as authoritative sources.
.
What is most likely happening here is Hamas controls all the remaining fuel and gives it out on a day by day basis so they can ration it for their needs. This is not unexpected but I do expect less credulous reporting from the media rather than blindly repeating narratives. What ends up happening is people just tune it all out because it is untrustworthy.
Czech news crew covering APEC in SF has $18,000 of equipment stolen in armed robbery in broad daylight.
https://www.ktvu.com/news/foreign-tv-crew-robbed-while-covering-apec-summit-in-san-francisco
“Bay Area television stations often send armed guards with reporters and photographers as a security measure while covering local news.”
.
Welcome to America.
One of my sources, Maria Drutska, works at a high level in the Ukrainian government… yesterday:
Mariadrutska @maria_drutska
????Amusing Monday morning
10:00 Russian Ministry of Defense:
“Assessing the current situation, the command of the ‘Dnieper’ group decided to redeploy troops to more advantageous positions east of the Dnieper. After regrouping, ‘Dnieper’ will free up some forces, which will be used for offensives in other directions.”
10:03 RIA Novosti reports that the Russian Ministry of Defense has annulled the news about the regrouping.
And I just wanted to suggest even more advantageous positions – to get the f*out of Ukraine and go home.
https://x.com/maria_drutska/status/1723977097838842242?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
Another source is a volunteer American combat nurse…recent post with pictures:
Rebekah Maciorowski, @bekamaciorowski
Some of my best medical evacuations have been performed wearing these boots, gifted to me by @TildeAddenbroo1. Tilde has driven to me on artillery range roads, so many times, to bring me much needed medical supplies. Thank you Tilde!
https://x.com/bekamaciorowski/status/1722166458963124468?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
I find it strange that many assume Russia will agree to a ceasefire if Ukraine is on the ropes and going down for the count when US and NATO support dries up due to a lack of both money and production capability.
.
Russia realizes that they are in an undeclared war with NATO. Why would Russia find it in their interest to allow NATO the opportunity to rebuild and rearm Ukraine so the conflict could continue at a later date? Makes no sense at all to my mind.
.
Russia will find it difficult to agree to any proposal from NATO consisting that the NATO political leaders bragged that they outright lied to Russia on the implementation of the Minsk agreement for Ukraine that produced a ceasefire from the 2014 conflict. This issue will make negotiations for an end to the conflict VERY difficult short of a full Ukraine surrender.
.
Do you see any “quit” in any of these guys and girls?
Another source is Tatarigami_UA, a Ukrainian officer in reserves. He has been very reliable.
He recently published an interview with a guy at the front [with pics]:
Tatarigami_UA @Tatarigami_UA
I’d like to introduce a concise yet important interview with a seasoned Ukrainian company commander, known by the callsign Zmiy (Snake). He’s a veteran of the 2014 and 2022 wars and offers direct insights into crucial issues. Strong language ahead.
https://x.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1722279627312251350?s=20
One last source, Eira, another volunteer combat nurse. She was in the Norwegian Army.
She posts as “The Dirty Dozen”, her unit’s call sign. This is a video of the happy couple:
The Dirty Dozen, @DirtydozenEira, Nov 9
I came to this war expecting nothing, and found everything. In this war I found purpose, in this unit I found home, and in him I found the love of my life. My dear friends, it is my surprise and joy to tell you there will be a frontline wedding,.
https://x.com/DirtydozenEira/status/1722741791399477420?s=20
Ed Forbes,
I don’t assume that at all. What I assume is that the Biden administration ought to be talking (informally) with the Russians about how a cease-fire and negotiated settlement could happen. Unlike you and me (and endless bloggers), the Russians and US military intelligence know quite accurately what is happening in Ukraine, so are in a better position to rationally discuss a ceasefire.
.
If the military/aid situation in Ukraine is in fact dire (and I don’t know that it is or will be!), then obviously the Russians would need some incentives to agree to a ceasefire and negotiations. Some combination of de facto control of land, a schedule for lifting of sanctions, and Ukraine not entering NATO would probably be enough if the Russians believe their position in Ukraine is strong, and something less than that if they don’t think their position is strong. What will actually happen? Nobody knows.
Another daily missive from the endless stream of bloggers. This one is from Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine:
“Putin currently has a very cynical and clear goal. He is willing to waste whatever number of his own people in order to demonstrate at least some tactical result until mid-December, when he plans to announce his presidential campaign.
Russia already loses more people and equipment near Avdiivka and at a faster pace than it was the case, for example, in Bakhmut.
It is really difficult to resist such pressure. And every warrior who holds posts and performs combat tasks there deserves our deepest gratitude. They are true heroes!
The more Russian forces that are destroyed near Avdiivka now, the worse the overall frontline situation for Russia will be.
Slava Ukraini “
Video:
https://x.com/zelenskyyua/status/1724538502870647204?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
Apparently, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg hasn’t gotten the message that it’s time to throw in the towel. He has been sounding like a hawk for the past week:
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg participated in a meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council of the European Union with EU Defence Ministers in Brussels on Tuesday (14 November 2023)
“On the situation in Ukraine, Mr Stoltenberg highlighted that intense fighting continues. “The situation on the battlefield is difficult. And that just makes it even more important that we sustain and step up our support for Ukraine because we cannot allow President Putin to win,” said the Secretary General. “Ukraine must prevail as a sovereign independent nation in Europe and it’s in our interest to support Ukraine,” he said.”
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_220058.htm
Joint press conference by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg with Defence Minister of Germany, Boris Pistorius
“We have to remember and understand that if President Putin wins in Ukraine, it is tragic for the Ukrainians, but it’s also dangerous for us, because then the message to President Putin or other authoritarian leaders will be that when they use military force, when they violate international law, when they invade another country, they get what they want. And that will make us more vulnerable.”
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_219876.htm
And right on cue, Germany acts:
“Ukraine updates: Germany to double 2024 military aid to Kyiv”
https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-updates-germany-to-double-2024-military-aid-to-kyiv/live-67379813#:~:text=German%20Defense%20Minister%20Boris%20Pistorius%20announced%20that%20Berlin%20would%20double,(%248.5%20billion)%20by%202024.
I guess sometimes the obvious has to be explicitly stated: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2023/11/15/why_gop_abortion_messaging_isnt_working_150059.html
.
If Ron DeSantis wants to understand why his popularity dropped, he need only consider for a minute how unpopular Florida’s ‘heartbeat’ ban is, and how his drop in support in national polls coincided with the passage of that legislation. Whether supporting that law was sincere, or a craven effort to get to the right of Trump by any means possible, it was almost unbelievably stupid politics, and terribly damaging to the GOP’s electoral prospects nationwide.
.
Hint to (stupid) politicians: don’t try to pass legislation adamantly opposed by 2/3 of voters; doing so will make you unpopular.
Having my cake and eating it too…
Wacko environmental study from The Transnational Institute (TNI) claims that reductions in Global Warming funding are paying for the ramp-up in NATO country defense spending:
“How NATO’s 2% military spending targets contribute to climate breakdown”
Perfect!
https://www.tni.org/en/publication/climate-crossfire
SteveF (Comment #226602): “If Ron DeSantis wants to understand why his popularity dropped, he need only consider for a minute how unpopular Florida’s ‘heartbeat’ ban is, and how his drop in support in national polls coincided with the passage of that legislation”.
.
But that is not what happened. According to the RCP average, his initial big drop (30% to 24%) occurred right at the end of March, two weeks before he signed the heartbeat bill. Effect does not precede cause. It is not credible to claim that the bill caused the drop, especially since the only people outside Florida likely to know about the bill were the activists on both sides. They are either Democrats or liked the bill.
.
What seems to have cause that drop was the Bragg indictment of Trump. That helped Trump and, since polling is a zero sum game, hurt DeSantis.
.
The article you cite makes a very different claim than yours. The author argues (quite plausibly, IMO) that GOP positions on abortion pretty much don’t matter:
and
What matters is messaging. The actual positions don’t matter much except to the extent that they impact messaging.
.
SteveF: “Hint to (stupid) politicians: don’t try to pass legislation adamantly opposed by 2/3 of voters; doing so will make you unpopular.”
.
The Dems routinely push an abortion position opposed by 80% of voters and get away with it. It would make more sense to say don’t support a position adamantly opposed by the MSM. So are we to let the press rule us? I don’t want that.
Mike M,
Did you read the article?
.
The Florida “hearbeat” bill was “in process” and supported by DeSantis long before he signed it. The drop in support for DeSantis lasted a lot longer than the few days between the two events you point to. I know plenty of people in Florida who immediately rolled their eyes and basically said “What the heck?” DeSantis lost a lot of support immediately… in Florida, and later elsewhere.
.
The Dems get away with supporting an extreme position on late term abortions not because of the MSM, but because while most women (and men!) oppose late term abortions (and nearly all abortions are in fact first trimester!) they oppose even more strongly the possibility that first trimester abortions will be effectively banned if Republicans gain political control. DeSantis and the heartbeat bill obviously reinforced that opposition. The article I linked makes that point pretty clearly.
.
The easy passage of a constitutional amendment in very-red Ohio, overriding the legislature on abortion, ought to be a wake-up for Republicans; seems they are too asleep to hear what the voters are telling them. My prediction: Republicans will lose control of the House in 2024, because voters (with good cause) don’t trust them to not restrict early abortions.
SteveF
Yep. The thing is even many republicans aren’t for really short term bans.
.
On this issue, Nikki Haley has the correct position for a GOP candidate. And moreover, not only can’t you get a ban on abortion– or even a very, very short term window– pushing for that will only make people go for the longer term window.
SteveF
Precisely. People are aware enough about the bill before he signed it. The story gets covered long before a Governor signs it.
.
Also correct. That’s why pushing to ban abortion of even have things like 6 week windows will result in more permissive abortion laws.
.
You make it an “either it’s a 6 week abortion limit or a 40 week limit” many, many, many people who would accept 12 to 20 will pick 40, not 6.
.
Not unlikely. And they will also lose some seats in state houses.
.
MikeM
To repeat what I wrote above
I don’t “support” a 40 week limit. I’d prefer 12 to 20. But I’m not supporting 6.
.
And honestly, the claims that a 40 week limit abortion bill was just passed in the US are generally exaggerations — and further clarification of when late term abortions are permitted just results in eye rolls from the people you just tried to convince they should be against it.
I agree that the strength of opposition is asymmetric. More people will strongly oppose a ban shorter than 15-20 weeks than will strongly oppose no limits. But that is not true among Republicans. So although it matters in general elections, I don’t see it mattering much in primaries.
.
What fraction of the general population can tell you off the tops of their heads what the abortion law is in Florida? I am guessing it is no more than 10-20% and consists mostly of four groups of people: Pro abortion activists, anti abortion activists, political junkies, and Floridians. None of those have much negative impact on nationwide polling among Republicans.
.
FWIW, I think that Republicans should insist that abortion be regulated at the state level and should support 15 week limits with exceptions at the state level. That would be good policy and good politics. Maybe signing the heartbeat bill will hurt DeSantis in the general election. But that is not a big negative in the primaries.
lucia (Comment #226607): “That’s why pushing to ban abortion of even have things like 6 week windows will result in more permissive abortion laws.”
.
That might be the best conservative argument that I have seen against overly restrictive abortion laws.
For the most part none of the abortion stuff actually matters … for abortion, what I read is that the number of abortions didn’t change once all the new laws took effect. People just traveled for abortion.
.
It does matter for politics though and the GOP will only hurt themselves pandering to an extreme position few people support except in some southern states. They can choose to lose some votes now for a position that will likely get overturned in a voter referendum or they can choose to throw in the towel.
.
It is telling that the GOP is fighting a voter referendum on the issue in FL.
.
Dumb politics lose elections. It’s OK if that is a principled issue that is important and one chooses to die on that hill. In this case you aren’t really changing the number of abortions.
MikeM
Not important. Their opinion can change when they read a story and then they can forget the specifics. People take shortcuts. That’s why sound bites also matter.
.
The evidence suggest you are mistaken. And Trump’s rhetoric afterward suggests he thinks you are mistaken– he thinks this is an issue with voters.
lucia (Comment #226612): “And Trump’s rhetoric afterward suggests he thinks you are mistaken– he thinks this is an issue with voters.”
.
Or he thinks he’s got the nomination in the bag and thinks it will be an issue with general election voters. As I said above, that might well be the case.
Abortion and gun rights probably have the biggest proportion of single issue voters out there. Republicans have more to lose than they have to gain here IMO.
The natural result of grade inflation, social promotion, and the push to eliminate standards.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/15/us/child-progress-beyond-grades/index.html
“The gap between perceptions and standardized test results is wider for Blacks and Hispanics than for Whites. While more than 85% of Black and Hispanic parents say their child is at or above grade level reading or math, NAEP data shows just 17% of Black students and 21% of Hispanic students are proficient in reading.”
.
That’s a pretty big gap, and the hill to climb there is Mount Everest at this point. It’s generational. Continuing to remove all standards is delusional.
Tom Scharf,
“Abortion and gun rights probably have the biggest proportion of single issue voters out there. Republicans have more to lose than they have to gain here IMO.”
.
Yes indeed. Gun rights seem second tier right now, but have a couple of mass shooting by crazy people near the 2024 election, and it will become more important. Mass shootings are absolutely NOT a big issue in terms of number of deaths… most all gun deaths (excluding suicides) are by criminals who are unlicensed and carrying pistols illegally. Mass shooting deaths “with assault rifles”, and especially mass shootings of strangers, amount to a tiny fraction of the total…. but always get 100 times more coverage and endlessly negative headlines, because the MSM types would like to ban all guns, knowing full well the 2nd Amendment makes that impossible. The extreme MSM hype is an electoral bonanza for Democrats, and their propaganda arm (AKA the MSM) knows that.
.
Abortion, OTOH, is very cogent and will make a difference in 2024 and beyond…. unless Republican politicians start acting like rational people instead of zealots. I’m not optimistic, since zealots are 1) unwilling to compromise and 2) offensively arrogant.
.
Democrats are going to pound Republicans on this issue for the foreseeable future. It has already cost Republicans a lot, and will continue to, unless they recognize this is a losing issue for them… a strong majority consensus always beats zealots.
Tom Scharf,
“NAEP data shows just 17% of Black students and 21% of Hispanic students are proficient in reading..”
.
And it has only gotten worse over the last 50 years.
.
There is a huge achievement gap, and it has very little to do with family income or school system expenditures and very much to do with culture, responsibility, and effort. The response of “educational professionals”…. low expectations, dumbing down courses, grade inflation, passing kids in spite of failure, accepting kids into schools where they can’t succeed… has only made things much worse.
.
The next “solution” on offer (equality of outcome regardless of capability) is pure socialist drivel, and marks what seems to be the final decline of western intellectual tradition. So long as the root causes (which are mainly social and cultural) are not addressed, the “achievement gap” will remain… or get worse.
15 weeks seems eminently sensible physiologically and emotionally but there are a number of conditions (anencephaly etc) that at present are only detected at the 20 week USS.
Why I believe the limit should be at 20 weeks.
At 20 weeks , with a lot of work, a foetus can actually be viable if born so technically , to me , could be described as a murder.
Also as pointed out a stricter lower level leads to more extreme “freedoms”being legislated or pushed.
Is it really 50 years since Roe and Wade?
Amazing for America,
angach,
This site on radiology: https://radiopaedia.org/articles/anencephaly
says anencephaly can be detected as early as 11 weeks and with near certainty by 14 weeks:
“Anencephaly may be sonographically detectable as early as 11 weeks. Ultrasound can be a non-invasive, cost-effective, and fast method to detect anencephaly and has an accuracy of approximately 100% at 14 weeks.”
.
There is no real need for more than 15 or 16 weeks to detect major birth defects.
SteveF (Comment #226619): “There is no real need for more than 15 or 16 weeks to detect major birth defects.”
.
There are several potential problems with that claim. (1) Some major defect being detectable that early does not mean that all are. (2) There is some uncertainty in estimating weeks, so more than 1-2 weeks leeway might be needed. (3) Not everyone has access to or accesses top quality medical care. (4) Insurance and/or Medicaid might not pay for the every possible test and some people don’t have insurance.
.
Such problems can be dealt with by allowing exceptions beyond 15 weeks.
Mike M,
“Such problems can be dealt with by allowing exceptions beyond 15 weeks.”
.
Sure, and anencephaly is a good example, since it is generally incompatible with life after birth. Of course, even with exceptions there will be many women who do not get an ultrasound diagnostic, even after 16 weeks, so some tragic births will still happen. Women of childbearing age should be sure to have plenty of folic acid in their diet or via supplements, and not get too much sun.
Mike M
Add to that:A week or two might be needed to make an agonizing decision too…. And test results are generally not received the day of the test. Those don’t add a huge amount of time, but it’s not like “schedule test, get the test, get results, make decision, get to the abortion clinic” can happen in seconds. 1-2 weeks leeway relative to the time required to do the test seems reasonable if we think negative outcome is a reason to permit abortion.
.
As you note: rules to allow exceptions can be the way to go. If you actually have a negative outcome from an test, then you get the exception.
.
If we don’t think the negative outcome matter, then the fact the test exists is irrelevant altogether.
I’ve decided to accept my fate and try to embrace The Trump. I do enjoy his bombastic style:
“In honor of our great Veterans on Veteran’s Day, we pledge to you that we will root out the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs that lie like vermin within the confines of our Country, lie, steal and cheat on Elections, and will do anything possible, whether legally or illegally, to destroy America and the American Dream.”
More on the lawless theme, the radical left has elected 70 prosecutors… Map from Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1725239410558472430?s=20:
What is amazing is they caught the Republicans flat-footed and they still have no counterpunch.
Russell, sounds straightout of Mussolini’s playbook. What do you understand Trump means by “root out”? To my mind, there are too many Americans (of both parties) which dream of a single party state (in fact if not in name).
Finally another Starship test launch scheduled for Saturday morning. Should be interesting.
SpaceX got its launch license from the FAA today. They will launch their giant “Starship” rocket (11 million pounds weight, 17 million pound of thrust) on Saturday 8:00 AM eastern.
.
In reusable form, the rocket can take 150 metric tons payload to low earth orbit. In expendable form, that increases to 250 metric tons. This compares to 18.4 metric tons for the Falcon 9 (carrying 53 “Starlink” satellites). So a rough estimate: one Starship launch could carry ~ 400 Starlink satellites, or 8% of the total now in service. Musk wants to have at least 12,000 satellites in orbit, or 7,000 more than today… that is ~18 launches over a year or two. Much rides for Musk on Saturday’s launch.
mark bofill,
cross posted.
So many “Soros Linked Progressive Prosecutors” in Colorado!
(What does that phrase mean. Real question. Did Soros pay for their political campaigns? What is a “soros affiliated group”?)
Starship was going to be tomorrow, but they have to replace a grid fin I think. These things are always exciting because the odds of failure are high.
.
Last time:
Launchpad destroyed
Lost multiple engines
Flight termination sequence failed
Hydraulic steering lost after engine failure
Booster stage didn’t separate
.
I think they have multiple launches yet before it gets anywhere near flight ready, although they may try StarLink soon enough I expect. They want to figure out how to refuel in orbit, catch the booster at the tower and the upper stage landing on its own.
.
They will be trying pseudo soft landings over the ocean and hopefully testing the heat shield.
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-2
.
This stuff is crazy, as they say, Excitement guaranteed.
lucia (Comment #226628): “So many “Soros Linked Progressive Prosecutors” in Colorado!
(What does that phrase mean. Real question. Did Soros pay for their political campaigns? What is a “soros affiliated group”?)”
.
Paying for someone’s campaign, other than your own, is illegal. But you can put unlimited funds into a PAC to support campaigns. That is what Soros does. Of course, I can’t say for sure what someone else means by a phrase.
(Comment #226630): “Thank you for your comment! It has been added to the moderation queue and will be published here if approved by the webmaster.”
.
I can’t imagine what that comment offends.
Mike,
Maybe at one point I put “Soros” in the badword list. I can get away with everything though….
Hell has frozen over.
.
Apple announces it will support RCS standard for Apple to Android messaging.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/11/apple-announces-rcs-support-for-imessage/
SteveF
I have been retired from active GP practice for 8 years.
Obstetrics involved 3 routine USS at around 6 weeks if any problems or to stage the actual age, 13 weeks re Down’s Syndrome (sometimes with amniocentesis if indicated) and at 20 weeks to exclude anencephaly and other potential abnormalities.
All cost money.
Techniques have evolved since I started many years ago and USS in particular have improved out of sight.
These time guidelines have not altered that much I think as they all revolve around particular needs of obstetrics.
While earlier diagnosis would be helpful some conditions do not show up til the second half of pregnancy thinking of heart valve problems and some kidney drainage problem’s necessitating later USS for medical attention not abortion.
USS can be wrong and can miss diagnoses that seem obvious, twins for instance, and the 20 week USS gives a much clearer picture and safer diagnostic rate than say a 16 week USS while still allowing a difficult but safe abortion at an early enough stage.
Cases do exist of having abortions because of wrong USS diagnosis of anencephaly and one could lose a normal pregnancy in the act of trying to detect an abnormal one when amniocentesis had to be resorted to (1 in 100?).
If one has to resort to legal terms they have to help not only the mother but the treating people and the general community.
Doctors have a right and the community expects people not to have to perform abortions on viable foetuses.
20 weeks is that common ground.
Halfway (almost) between conception and birth.
Lucia,
“(What does that phrase mean. Real question. Did S**** pay for their political campaigns? What is a “S**** affiliated group”?)
The definition is in the fine print at the lower left. It’s more than just funding. I enlarged the definitions here:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1725327887648047569?s=20
The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
published the document that graphic came from:
https://www.policedefense.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Justice_For_Sale_LELDF_report.pdf
[The S-word is verboten]
Phil Scadden (Comment #226624)
“Russell, sounds straightout of Mussolini’s playbook. What do you understand Trump means by “root out”?
I don’t take Trump’s words literally. Think of him as Jesus, speaking in parables.
Russel
“Joy Behar told her co-host Thursday on ABC’s “The View” that she believes it is an “oxymoron” to say you love former President Donald Trump and Jesus Christ.”
Not a very Christian thing to say?
–
In better news Biden temporarily reaches 16% for the first time in a while RCP
Angech,
“Joy Behar told her co-host Thursday on ABC’s “The View” that she believes it is an “oxymoron” to say you love former President Donald Trump and Jesus Christ.”
“Not a very Christian thing to say?”
I’m fairly certain most Christians do not look to Joy Behar for inspiration.
As I noted up thread, I think Haley is part of the problem, not part of the solution. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/16/nikki-haley-social-media-anonymity-00127612
DeSantis noted immediately that the Federalist Papers were all anonymous…. ouch! After much criticism, she tried to walk it back, but the damage was done.
.
She is a creature of government, and her instincts appear to me to be standard “big-government-should-control-everything”, not a desire for liberty. Yes, she is better than Biden on issues like the boarder, but that is a very low hurtle to clear. She is nearly a rubber stamp on endless, pointless, costly wars, stupid regulations, and ever expanding government…. just wants a little slower expansion.
I don’t think government has any new role to play in regulating ‘the truth’ online at all. The free market could provide ‘truth ratings’ if such a thing came to be in demand (I don’t think it is). The ‘best’ one (whatever in heck that might mean) could come to dominate the market, or maybe there would be niches for different interests.
The only power the government has that the market does not is to censor under force of law; that ‘cure’ is worse than the disease, generally speaking.
Misinformation and disinformation are mostly just free speech at the end of the day. If we don’t have the freedom to be wrong [and to communicate our wrong ideas, loud and proud], we ain’t free.
Maybe Joe Biden did me a favor. I’m going to have to strike the word ‘aint’ from my vocabulary. It’s sad in a way, but. Sometimes we have to move on.
The social media companies could force people to not be anonymous. You definitely can’t be anonymous in China by government decree. I don’t support this but also recognize that being anonymous is a big cause of the sewer that social media / comment sections have degenerated into.
.
One thing that can be done is an option for users to ignore / block all unverified accounts. Just like social media censoring / filtering it baffles me why the user just cannot select from differing levels of AI filtering. The one-size-fits-all censorship crowd are more interested in pushing political agendas.
.
As an example I don’t think the “turn off the Jew-hate filter” option would be especially productive for society but doubt that it changes much in the grand scheme. If I could turn on a “disable Trump stories” on legacy media sites I would do it in an instant. I might end up with a blank page though.
I think I can see a trend [or lack thereof]:
November 17,23- Trump 59% D+H Total 26.4%
October 19,23- Trump 59% D+H Total 20.5%
September 20,23- Trump 59.8% D+H Total 17.5%
April 18,23- Trump 54% D+H Total 26.2%
July 27,22- Trump 54% D+H Total 24.8%
RCP
Sure. And next thing you know people go start different social media companies where people can be anonymous, if people want to be anonymous on social media.
We cannot have restrictions on being anonymous combined with people being “held accountable” and getting fired for their private speech unrelated to their job. I don’t have an answer for this, it seems like a fundamental conflict.
.
According to legends passed down by word of mouth we did somehow survive without the Internet and social media in cave man days.
I don’t have an issue with that. Nobody owes me a job. In fact I’ve been fired before, essentially for posting a dilbert remark on my Facebook page because the CEO was an insecure little schmoe. It’s all good.
The problem here is not knowing where the lines are. If HR departments just make judgment calls case by case then employees don’t even know when they are violating rules. Most employees won’t break rules if they know what they are. The only option is to be anonymous or just post cat pictures.
.
Publicly posting corporate hate is likely crossing a line, but privately posting something unrelated to work and another disgruntled employee anonymously turning you in is another thing entirely.
.
People signing open letters anonymously is kind of silly, but signing them can also bring repercussions. Here is a recent example of proper repercussions:
https://www.semafor.com/article/11/16/2023/la-times-bars-reporters-who-signed-open-letter-from-covering-gaza
.
It’s a mess.
Tom,
I’m not saying life isn’t tough, it is. Stuff happens. Sometimes we work for dweebs who want to interfere with our private lives, sometimes we are in precarious enough situations that we can’t tell the dweebs to go fornicate with themselves without suffering for it, I get that. But life is tough anyway you slice it.
The better option IMO, where possible, is not to work for psychos who think they can control what you personally post on social media. Also – some rules make sense and I agree with you that people mostly follow them – I work in Defense, obviously there are a lot of topics I’m supposed to avoid talking about in my personal life. I agree that it’s nice to know the rules, yep.
[Edit: In fact, my company would probably be happier if I didn’t post on blogs that I work a defense related job, but I don’t think it crosses any lines. It’s not that hard to deduce that most of the engineers in Huntsville also do.]
I don’t think laws stop employers from being malevolent and stupid, I guess is what I’m getting at. There is always some other way for an obnoxious boss who wants to make an employee’s life hell to accomplish it, regardless of the rules. Life is tough. Try to avoid being eaten by psychos. Many will play, some will lose.
I don’t support laws for private employment beyond the usual discrimination and fair practices stuff.
.
Corporations have been getting rid of a-holes forever. They are just put on double-secret probation until an excuse is found for their termination, or another round of layoffs occurs. The best way to not get fired for any reason is being a reliable productive employee. People are a bit more entitled than they used to be regarding employment.
I agree with all of that.
Tom Scharf,
Thanks for the link to the LATimes response above (in #226647).
I think those employees should have a longer time-out (presumably from Gaza/Israel topics only) than 3 months. I find it difficult to believe that the signees will ever reach a point where their personal opinions are not discernible in their reporting.
That said, it is my opinion that the organization’s viewpoints (in general, not necessarily on this topic) are apparent in coverage, despite the editor’s laudable words.
Tom Scharf,
“The best way to not get fired for any reason is being a reliable productive employee.”
.
Nice if that were it so. I went from 18 years with excellent “performance evaluations” (and multiple cash bonuses for “exceptional contributions”) to “you are going to be fired very soon” in 4 weeks time when I objected to going along with a criminal conspiracy to make knowingly false reports to the EPA on emissions.
.
I quit and started a consulting business. Smartest thing I ever did.
.
There are lots of very bad people running businesses, especially big businesses, where the most dishonest and corrupt of even moderately competent employees are destined to be promoted. Or as they say, the fish rots from the head down.
Lara Trump released a Country version of Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down”:
https://youtu.be/KRuYbJstkb4?si=9Z5cKd-9S5STXp4V
I really liked the recording in its own right, but the political theater is priceless:
“Lara Trump’s ‘Cheap Move’ Against Tom Petty Slammed”
https://www.newsweek.com/lara-trump-tom-petty-wont-back-down-donald-1829542
Spacex T-38 and counting. Looking super cool in th light at daybreak.
https://www.youtube.com/live/uOI35G7cP7o?si=Ux8sREAkkQ77MFJ7
It’s off!
Mission was a success
That was exciting as always. All engines worked all the way, booster separation worked, launchpad seems intact, flight termination obviously worked on 1st stage, ha ha.
.
Looks like they couldn’t quite control the 1st stage for re-entry after separation so rapid unscheduled disassembly.
.
The second stage telemetry got lost right at engine shut down and I don’t think anyone knows what happened. It could be landing near you anytime soon …
.
A lot of progress this time, would have liked to see attempted landings and second stage getting around the world.
Official launch video from SpaceX
https://x.com/spacex/status/1725862657780281349?s=61&t=q3_InP1nXWdPIXqj8656mQ
The second stage disintegrated about 30 seconds before scheduled engine cut-off. There’s obviously much still to be done. I think it is key to know what happened at the launch pad…. no word of damage yet.
I’m always a little astonished at issues like ‘lost communications and couldn’t re-establish’. Relatively speaking, it seems like the communications ought to be cheap enough to have triple or quadruple redundancy without significantly impacting cost. But maybe I have this wrong, communications equipment isn’t exactly my area.
The feed I was watching you couldn’t see any explosions or obvious flight termination. It just looked like the engines turned off and telemetry was lost.
.
It was supposed to get to get 28K km/h I think and telemetry was lost at 24K so It seems it did not hit make it to engine cutoff as SteveF said. The last few seconds of telemetry will hopefully be enough, otherwise a hard cut makes things difficult to diagnose.
.
SpaceX usually doesn’t say a lot about the specifics of failures.
The major news outlets are starting to increasingly turn against Ukraine and to report on the true state of the Ukraine “democratic” regime.
.
Ukraine Sure Doesn’t Look Like a Democracy Anymore
.
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-sure-doesnt-look-like-democracy-anymore-opinion-1844799
.
This war has many causes, but “protecting” democracy isn’t one of them.
SpaceX, @SpaceX,
“Congratulations to the entire SpaceX team on an exciting second integrated flight test of Starship!
Starship successfully lifted off under the power of all 33 Raptor engines on the Super Heavy Booster and made it through stage separation.”
“After losing communication with Starship, SpaceX said at about 11½ minutes into the flight it had had also lost data on Starship and that the rocket was not on the flight path expected.
“What we do believe right now is that the automated flight termination system on second stage appears to have triggered very late in the burn, as we were headed downrange out over the Gulf of Mexico,” said SpaceX’s principal integration engineer John Insprucker said during a livestream of the launch, according to Space.com.
SpaceX was forced to destroy Starship so it didn’t veer off course, Insprucker told CNN.com.”
.
Sounds like a late engine failure may have sent the second stage off course.
Ed Forbes (Comment #226663): “Ukraine Sure Doesn’t Look Like a Democracy Anymore”.
.
That Newsweek hit piece is a combination of exaggeration and untruths.
.
Ukraine has a huge number of political parties. Only one of the banned parties had any significant presence in parliament. That party was led by a guy who defected to Russia and had an MP who on social media openly welcomed the Russian invaders. The party did denounce the invasion, but not until two weeks after it started, when the invasion had stalled.
.
I am pretty sure that no religions have been banned, certainly not the Orthodox Church. Actions have been taken against the hierarchies of churches that were acting as a fifth column for Moscow.
.
I think it is not uncommon for press freedom to be restricted during war. Often the press goes along voluntarily.
.
The restrictions on civil liberties were not unilateral by Zelensky. They were all approved by parliament and upheld by the courts. Ukraine is not simply a country fighting a war. Pretty much the entire country is a war zone.
.
Towards the end, the article gives a nod to the exceptional circumstances. Then it tells an outright lie: that Churchill never cancelled elections. The UK had a general election on fall 1935. Under their constitution, the next election would have been normally held in fall 1939 and no later than fall 1940. There was no general election in 1939. Or 1940. Or 1941. Or 1942. Or 1943. Or 1944. Finally a general election was held in 1945, but it was only called after VE Day. There were by-elections held, but they were shams, rigged by mutual agreement between all the parties in Parliament.
In the SpaceX video, it looked like the second stage engines cut off, and then 3 or 4 seconds later the ship self-destructed, maybe because it was about 3,000 Km/hr short of the expected final speed, and so would come down very far from it’s intended destination.
.
Before the shutdown, it looked like the oxygen and methane tanks were not at the same levels and one would run out before the other.
Mike, on the church ban:
.
“Ukrainian parliament votes to ban Orthodox Church over alleged links with Russia”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/20/ukrainian-parliament-votes-to-ban-orthodox-church-over-alleged-links-with-russia
.
Ed Forbes (Comment #226668),
So the Guardian publishes an ill-informed article with a misleading headline. Big deal. Not hard to find a more thorough treatment.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/october/ukraine-law-ban-russian-ukrainian-orthodox-church-uoc.html
mark bofill (Comment #226646)
“Nobody owes me a job. In fact I’ve been fired before, essentially for posting a Dilbert remark on my Facebook page because the CEO was an insecure little schmoe.”
–
Whats App and Face book should be private to the group hence anonymous.
Who is in your group was the problem.
–
Why does Dilbert appeal do much? Even better than the Far Side.
angech,
I posted a Dilbertesque comment. If memory serves, my remark was ‘Finally cracked the code! The only reason management asks me for schedule estimates is to make sure they don’t accidentally give me enough time to do the job properly.’
I honestly thought it was truth. That company would set the most arbitrary deadlines. They were a start up, only a dozen people; we could all see there was utterly and completely no reason for the arbitrary rush. I’d get something done in a hurry and sit on my hands for 6 months afterwards.
Mark,
my favorite Dilbert was,
.
“Marketing told them we could do WHAT?
John,
~grins~
That’s a great one. Timeless truths..
Generally speaking if you are interviewing for a job and lots of people have Dilbert cartoons taped to their cubicle walls then you want to keep looking.
When even a vision impaired numbskull like Richard Haass begins to see reality, you know things are going to change in Ukraine: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/redefining-success-ukraine
.
The time scale for a negotiated ceasefire remains uncertain, but the current policy (“as much as it takes, as long as it takes”) has always been, is, and will remain untenable, and IMHO, a terrible waste of lives and money. While nearly blind neocons like Haass and Nikki! will resist, some kind of accommodation of Russian regional interests and normalization of trade and diplomacy will be required to end the fighting long term, and for certain that will happen. I just wish it had been in March 2022.
Tom Scharf,
I laughed a lot more at Dilbert when the trauma of having worked in an evilly managed company was still fresh in my mind.
Mike M. (Comment #226666)
November 18th, 2023 at 11:10 am
During wars they all do it. Where “it” is using emergency powers of the state to negate individual freedoms. That it can occur in nations where freedoms are ordinarily more protected than in other national regimes presents fodder for the argument that much more effort is required to avoid wars – at least for those who are freedom loving.
State power loving politicians learn quickly that war emergency powers can be used in peaceful times by invoking emergencies on a regular basis. Like the frog in the pot of water that gradually comes to a boil, the populace can be conditioned to accept a permanent emergency.
The Biden administration has used the word emergency to rationalize executive orders and actions.
Peace would be good. But it seems to me that a mere cease fire would condemn Ukraine to a slow death in purgatory.
SteveF,
.
I didn’t recognize it at the time, but my first two jobs were with wonderful outfits. I was a sort of appentice toolmaker at a local machine shop when I was a kid. The old man at the shop was very patient and gradually introduced me to the lathes, milling machines, and shapers and of course the drill presses.
.
We built manufacturing equipment for the local factories. Every project was different and as I got less clumsy, I got to do more challenging parts of the jobs. I loved it, but my dad was unconvinced that there was a future in it and so off to the university.
.
When I graduated in 1968, I went to work for the company that Lucia’s father-in-law was a civil engineer at. Company was a partnership of 13 engineers with 750 employees in several offices. These guys had all done the work, so there was no nonsense with impossible promises to clients.
.
I was probably one of the very few architects who loved working with engineers and because of this I did more and more of the plant layout for wastewater treatment plants which were the bulk of our projects at the time. It was fun. I spent 10 years there.
.
Then they sold the partnership to an outfit in California. There was a dinner to introduce the new “owners” to whom I took an instant dislike. I’d imagined that I might be a partner someday given that the present architectural partner was in his early ’60s at the time, and I had thought I was a good candidate to be his successor.
.
I found another job and left.
.
Except for a wonderful but scary 7 years with our own company as a VAR in Miami for Sun Microsystems, the rest of my career in a number of places was spent being squeezed between the sales types who always seemed to have the senior positions and the reality of the projects I was running. I was almost always the top guy who actually knew what was going on both in design and the field and who got to sit in meetings with managemenr which we secretly characterized as fantasy land.
.
None of these places were crooked, but it was tough to report to people who didn’t appreciate that what we were trying to do was often difficult, and once in a while a project’s success was the result of somone being way out on a limb design-wise.
.
I don’t think there are any kids at this blog, and maybe this won’t work anymore, but I never went to an interview if the first one was at HR.
.
And writing of HR, we were hiring for a civil project. In those days ads were placed in the newspaper. the responses would come first to HR who would cull them and forward the rest to me.
.
I wasn’t seeing the sort of responses I expected and asked HR if they could send me the rejects. They did and I immediately interviewed 6 of the rejects and hired two. HR had a fit and turned me in to the Managing Partner. I got a call with congratualtions for pissing off HR and a question of how I’d done it.
.
HR had rejected applications from people they thought were trouble-makers, which was exactly what I wanted.
.
there is probably too much here.
It was my experience that marketing wanted to rush a new product introduction to early fruition in order to beat the competition to the market and use the brand value of being an innovator. A more cynical reason could be that engineering and production needed to be pushed. There are truths in this thinking, but dealing with unrealistic schedules becomes a lose lose proposition for all involved.
The source of this problem is at the highest levels of management and primarily old school management where adversarial relationships within the corporate structure were tolerated and sometimes encouraged. This thinking could even detract from relationships with vendors and customers that could affect the product introduction.
While the term team can be overworked and applied where it does not actually exist, successful product introduction does require a team-like environment where all parties are involved and have an understanding of the other parties issues.
I learned early to do my own selections of interview candidates for the reason stated above.
I was fortunate during my work careers to being allowed to do my own thing. I realized just how fortunate I was when I heard stories from colleagues who were stifled by their management. Under different conditions I could see myself having been summarily fired a few times.
Nikki Haley definitely stepped in it with her lame brain scheme to ban anonymous social media posts. Here is an interesting take on what the kerfuffle means for the viability of her campaign:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/nikki-haley-has-a-glass-jaw
He exaggerates, but that is still a solid point. And it leads to his key observation:
Mike M,
“Ukraine to a slow death in purgatory.”
.
I don’t see that happening unless the only thing that happens is a ceasefire, not a more permanent negotiated settlement.
SteveF (Comment #226683): “I don’t see that happening unless the only thing that happens is a ceasefire, not a more permanent negotiated settlement.”
.
That is what I meant. A ceasefire without a permanent settlement would be a disaster for Ukraine.
.
I don’t think a ceasefire necessarily leads to a permanent settlement. It might even undermine a permanent settlement if Russia sees a ceasefire as being to their advantage, which it likely would be.
What doesn’t make sense is both sides sitting on quagmire front lines and killing each other off in large numbers when sitting there doing nothing accomplishes the same thing.
.
Ultimately, as we have beaten to death, Russia has to be interested in a settlement. They appear to be trying to wear down Western resolve while throwing bodies at the front. It might work, maybe not.
My experience is new small businesses tend to be in a financial crisis mode 24/7. They necessarily become unfocused and will accept disparate jobs for customers that fracture the product and make it difficult to maintain. Occasionally this works for the better as a company becomes successful doing things it didn’t originally intend to do.
Tom Scharf (Comment #226685)
“Ultimately, as we have beaten to death, Russia has to be interested in a settlement.”
Yes, and I have said before, Putin needs a war to maintain power, from the Wilson Center:
“For Putin, War Is Power (and Power Is War)”
“Everything can be blamed on this war. It allows secrecy. It allows the Kremlin to hide expenses, to ward off accusations of economic problems, to conceal theft, military mistakes, and even the number of the war dead, which is now a state secret.”
“Putin started his first term with a war (it was the Chechen War back then) and will end his time in power in the throes of another war. He has generally fared worse with the public in times of peace than in times of war. Whenever the war excitement he created subsided and life became suspiciously quiet, his support would start ebbing and he would reach for the only tool that he knows will guarantee him some backing. Whenever his wars started to produce less blood and suffering, he would set out on a new round. Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Ukraine—except for Ukraine in 2014 and Syria in 2015, the pace is roughly one every seven years.”
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/putin-war-power-and-power-war-why-russians-do-not-react-war?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAgeeqBhBAEiwAoDDhn9M2Y6LWc6sA7hIJgxnjE1FpbGzj2TIXfAcwAJKUCkRxk5XcnI8EXhoCB2cQAvD_BwE
DeSantis is leading by a lot over Haley for “second choice” votes in this NBC poll (pretty far down in article). Trump voters prefer DeSantis over Haley.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/poll-bidens-standing-hits-new-lows-israel-hamas-war-rcna125251
.
Maybe Trump will choke on a chicken nugget or something.
Russell, so what do think is the practical meaning of that Trump “parable” and why does it appeal?
Scott Manley analyzes the Starship flight and failures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hF2C7xE9Mj4
Phil,
I don’t really speak Russell, but I assume he was speaking in a not serious manner. Sarcasm? Irony? Trolling Trump supporters? Something like that. He will probably protest that this is not so, but I’d still take it with a grain of salt [were I] in your shoes.
Phil Scadden (Comment #226689)
“Russell, so what do think is the practical meaning of that Trump “parable” and why does it appeal?”
First the quote:
“In honor of our great Veterans on Veteran’s Day, we pledge to you that we will root out the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs that lie like vermin within the confines of our Country, lie, steal and cheat on Elections, and will do anything possible, whether legally or illegally, to destroy America and the American Dream.”
My translation:
“This great country is being taken over by evil people using evil methods. If not stopped it will mean the end of our way of life. I can stop them. You must elect me to stop them.”
…but remember in the “Trump talks like Jesus” analogy the meaning will be in the ear of the beholder so everyone hears what they want to hear.
I have it on good word from the media that Hitler once used the German word for vermin so … you know, wink wink. Apparently Hitler had ten fingers as well, so case closed.
https://www.npr.org/2023/11/17/1213746885/trump-vermin-hitler-immigration-authoritarian-republican-primary
.
On that subject, this years leading contender for funniest opinion article goes to:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/09/trump-president-democracy-threat-media-journalism
Yes, the media has been way too soft on Trump, it would be super helpful if they tried to explain how Orange Man Super Bad so that even red state morons could understand. They are being way too subtle as shown here.
Were you better of four years ago, or now? Whoever runs against Biden has to ask voters that question regularly. Biden has been a catastrophe for most people.
“Were you better off 4 years ago?” works double if it is Trump running against Biden.
Tom Scharf,
I agree The Guardian is the funniest of the loony-left outlets. They are a lot less influential than the NYT, but so over the top that they constantly border on purely ridiculous. I think of them in bombast as the lefty equivalent of someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene…. although in dishonesty, maybe closer to Representative Santos. Every word the Guardian writes is a lie, including ‘a’, ‘it’, and ‘and’. 😉
Trump received the endorsement of Governor Abbot of Texas today. He served food to Texas border guards and delivered an address.… and of course, he led with “Build The Wall”.
It was deep with policies to stem the border ‘Invasion’ His policies were reasonable and practical in my mind. They mimicked his successful border policies when he was President.
I couldn’t find just the statement but here is Politico’s version of it:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/19/abbott-endorses-trump-border-visit-00127978
edit, you can watch the remarks on YouTube.
I try to read a bit of CNN and , choke, the Guardian every second day to get a feel for the two different sides.
Also the Hill.
The guardian asks for support but not input so I guess they will never know how bad they are.
Is there a stage where no more presidential candidates are allowed? What is the window for Biden getting out and if he does not but dies after the window but before the election can someone else be shoe horned in?
Similar for Trump if he only gets barred before the election after getting the nomination?
The Republicans running are hoping something major will happen to him to give them a chance, not because they can beat him
angech,
It’s complicated: https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-constitutions-elections-us-supreme-court-91ce484b8046e6a555e172f42c4441f9
.
Once early voting starts (mail or in person) no changes can be made.
.
Ultimately the House of representatives would decide the president…. never happened, so it would be very contentious.
Even with a dementia patient like Biden, the chance of death between election and taking office is very small.
Trump plans to reinstate his successful ‘Build the Wall’ and other policies from his first term.
He also outlined some new initiatives:
— begin new “ideological screening” for all immigrants, aiming to bar “Christian-hating communists and Marxists” and “dangerous lunatics, haters, bigots and maniacs” from entering the United States. “Those who come to and join our country must love our country,” he has said.
— deport immigrants living in the country who harbor “jihadist sympathies” and send immigration agents to “pro-jihadist demonstrations” to identify violators. He would target foreign nationals on college campuses and revoke the student visas of those who express anti-American or antisemitic views.
— shift federal law enforcement agents, including FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration personnel, to immigration enforcement, and reposition at the southern border thousands of troops currently stationed overseas. “Before we defend the borders of foreign countries we must secure the border of our country,” he said said.
Deadlines to get on the November ballot are mostly in the summer. Deadlines for some primaries have already passed and many will pass in the next few weeks. Florida’s deadline is Nov 30, Texas is Dec 11, and California is Dec 15. Incomplete details are here:
https://ballotpedia.org/Deadline_to_run_for_president,_2024
“Sorry doubters, Starship actually had a remarkably successful flight”
“Leading with words like “failure” and “explosion” are kind of like putting the headline “Derek Jeter had a strike out” on a news story about the 2001 World Series game in which he later hit a walk-off home run. Like, it’s accurate. But it’s a lazy take that completely misses the point.
SpaceX built the Starship and Super Heavy rocket that launched on Saturday over the span of a couple of months at a price somewhere between one-tenth and one-hundredth the cost of NASA’s SLS rocket. Because it can build Starships rapidly and at a low cost, SpaceX has half a dozen more rockets in various stages of work, all awaiting their turn to go to space. Due to this iterative design methodology—flying to identify flaws, and rapidly incorporating those changes into new hardware—SpaceX can afford to fail. That is the whole point. By flying its vehicles, SpaceX can rapidly identify what parts of the rocket need to be changed. The alternative is, quite literally, years and years of analysis and meetings and more analysis. Iterative design is faster and cheaper—if you can afford to fail.”
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/11/heres-why-this-weekends-starship-launch-was-actually-a-huge-success/
Generative AI experimental:
“SpaceX, which believes in the mantra of “fail fast, learn faster.
SpaceX’s approach to rocket design and manufacturing is innovative. They embrace a culture of rapid iteration and constant innovation. This approach has led to countless innovations and milestones in spaceflight over the years.
“Fail fast, learn faster” is a philosophy that SpaceX has used since its inception. It encourages the company to take risks and experiment, even if some of those risks may fail. The focus is on quickly testing ideas and hypotheses, and learning from the results of those tests to improve and make better decisions in the future.
According to SpaceX’s “fail fast, learn faster” approach toward rocket design, successfully avoiding a repeat of past failures counts as major progress. However, the second flight revealed new challenges that Mr. Musk’s engineers must overcome.”
Russell Klier (Comment #226702),
Good post.
I think it generally true of entrepreneurs that they are unafraid to fail. It is generally true of bureaucrats that they are very afraid to fail. So of course a space program run by an entrepreneur looks very different from a program run by bureaucrats. In one case, failure is part of the process; in the other, failure is not an option.
.
One of the several reasons Trump is so jarring is that he operates in an entrepreneurial spirit whereas other politicians are bureaucrats at heart. So Trump will say things and propose ideas off the top of his head and see what resonates with people. Sometimes the result is an epic fail. Other politicians won’t risk that, everything they say is carefully vetted and tested with focus groups.