Posts Made By: Robert Pasken

From Jennifer Marohasy's blog


Radiative equilibrium is one of the foundation stones of radiative forcing theory. But it is not a law of physics, only a rather archaic and untested supposition found in climatology textbooks alone.

Oh well so much for basic science

Essentially the 11, 22, 87 and 230 year cycles in the number of sunspots changes the total amount energy by only small amounts to small to affect climate. Jack Eddy, an NCAR Solar Scientist, did a study in the 70's which seem to link sunspots to temperature changes. More recent work including more recent work, including research by Eddy indicate that the changes in Total Solar Irradiance are to small to significantly affect climate. The most recent work by Foukal (2006) indicates that sunspots have little effect on climate

Foukal, Peter (2003). "Can Slow Variations in Solar Luminosity Provide Missing Link between Sun and Climate?" Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 84(22): 205, 208, see also 84(48): 532.

Is it cool to see a spotless Sun Yes! Does change climate No!

From www.factcheck.org

The new McCain-Palin ad "Lashing Out" begins like an earlier ad we criticized, with its reference to Barack Obama's celebrity, but then goes down new paths of deception. It takes quotes from news organizations and uses them out of context in an effort to portray Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden, as unfairly attacking Sarah Palin and making sexist remarks. We've long been a critic of candidates (Obama included) usurping the credibility of independent news organizations and peddling false quotes, and this ad is particularly egregious. We found it airing in Denver, as recorded by the Campaign Media Analysis Group, a unit of TNS Media Intelligence.

So it looks like Obama-Biden aren't attacking Palin, it just the repugnants maing noise.

Again from www.factcheck.org

Less Than Honest

With its latest ad, released Sept. 10, the McCain-Palin campaign has altered our message in a fashion we consider less than honest. The ad strives to convey the message that FactCheck.org said "completely false" attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin had come from Sen. Barack Obama. We said no such thing. We have yet to dispute any claim from the Obama campaign about Palin.

Emphasis mine

Palin claims Alaska "produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy." That's not true.

Alaska did produce 14 percent of all the oil from U.S. wells last year, but that's a far cry from all the "energy" produced in the U.S.

Alaska's share of domestic energy production was 3.5 percent, according to the official figures kept by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

And if by "supply" Palin meant all the energy consumed in the U.S., and not just produced here, then Alaska's production accounted for only 2.4 percent.

I found an interesting quote from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about Palin

Fascist writer Westbrook Pegler, an avowed racist who Sarah Palin approvingly quoted in her acceptance speech for the moral superiority of small town values, expressed his fervent hope about my father, Robert F. Kennedy, as he contemplated his own run for the presidency in 1965, that "some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies."

It might be worth asking Governor Palin for a tally


Of course she not a racist, she merely hangs around with them. Of course times have changed, we now quote at acceptance speeches and cheer at sexist/racist comments when in the 60's it would caused a dead silent room in shock at the comments

From an economist no less!

"The major players in the financial sector do not like it. It is much more appealing for the financial industry to be bailed out at taxpayers’ expense than to bear their share of pain. Forcing a debt-for-equity swap or a debt-forgiveness would be no greater a violation of private property rights than a massive bailout, but it faces much stronger political opposition. The appeal of the Paulson solution is that it taxes the many and benefits the few. Since the many (we, the taxpayers) are dispersed, we cannot put up a good fight in Capitol Hill. The financial industry is well represented at all the levels. It is enough to say that for 6 of the last 13 years, the Secretary of Treasury was a Goldman Sachs alumnus. But, as financial experts, this silence is also our responsibility. Just as it is difficult to find a doctor willing to testify against another doctor in a malpractice suit, no matter how egregious the case, finance experts in both political parties are too friendly to the industry they study and work in.
Profits are private but losses are socialized?

The decisions that will be made this weekend matter not just to the prospects of the US economy in the year to come. They will shape the type of capitalism we will live in for the next fifty years. Do we want to live in a system where profits are private, but losses are socialized? Where taxpayer money is used to prop up failed firms? Or do we want to live in a system where people are held responsible for their decisions, where imprudent behavior is penalized and prudent behavior rewarded?

For somebody like me who believes strongly in the free market system, the most serious risk of the current situation is that the interest of few financiers will undermine the fundamental workings of the capitalist system. The time has come to save capitalism from the capitalists."

Yet more quotes from the current financial mess

If a Democratic president were backing a $700B bail-out, I have to think that Republicans would be crying "Socialism!" But if a Republican president does the same, the bail-out's natural enemies keep silent out of loyalty or in-group bias. It's a lot like the contemporary Republican reaction to Nixon's price controls - if our boy is doing it, how bad can it be?

Hmm. Conservatives abandoning all principle and intellectual honesty because of Republican in-group bias? Couldn't happen in America in the 21st century, could it?

In 2003 a study found that viewers of Fox News were significantly more misinformed about the Iraq war, with far greater percentages of viewers erroneously believing that Iraq possessed WMDs or that there was a credible link between the 9/11 attack and Saddam Hussein than those who got their news from other outlets like NPR and PBS. This has lead to the rise of websites like FactCheck and SourceWatch.

Seems that the denier community is in an uproar. The BBC has broadcast a 3 part documentary on global warming. It seems that the documentary shows Roy Spencer admitting that he was wrong over the early satellite temperature data. Pat Michaels, the Virginia State Climatologist who isn't, was filmed lecturing to the sceptic group and when he said "Global warming is real, he was mildly booed - to which he snapped back "get used to it". Then there TVMOB who is so upset that the whole 90 minutes he spent with the interviewer wasn't broadcast in it's entirety. Seems he felt he was treated as "if I was some potty peer. It was caddish of them". The lot of them are taking the BBC to court.