SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Land Shark who wrote (633572)10/28/2011 12:44:28 PM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578531
 
Anatomy of an Occupation By Robin of Berkeley


If you're wondering whether I was at Occupy Berkeley on October 15, the answer is no. I didn't have to attend; every day around here is Occupy Berkeley.

Because every moment of every day, I am surrounded by people who believe the insanity spewed by the occupants of Occupy. When I listened to the well-crafted video produced by three intrepid, Bay Area tea partiers at Occupy Oakland, none of what I heard surprised me. I thought, "Just another day in Berkeley or Oakland.

Around here almost everyone thinks like these Marxist spewing militants. While in your neck of the woods random strangers may comment, "Nice day if it doesn't rain," around here the words would be, "Nice day for a revolution."

While the video didn't shock me, it did disturb. What troubled me wasn't just how widespread is the diatribe, but that up until a few, short years ago, I believed all of it. Before Obama came on the scene, I could have been interviewed, mumbling and bumbling, just like those other frothing-at-the-mouth leftists.

I would also have parroted the Third-World loving party line. I too would have angrily and self-righteously proclaimed that the US was the root of all evil in the world.

To me, capitalism was bad, communism good (which I discovered after watching the handsome Warren Beatty in the sweeping thriller, Reds). I envied Cuba, home of the finest health care system in the world (thank you, Michael Moore). And I, like our current occupiers, ranted and raved about the racist, patriarchal, capitalist system with its millionaire fat cats (which I learned from reading books by those millionaire fat cats, Noam Chomsky, Al Franken, Gloria Steinem and the late Howard Zinn.)

I believed all of this despite the now glaring inconsistencies in my argument. For one, I (like most leftists) had mutual funds that invested in the horrible corporations. While I was never flush with money, I wouldn't have minded being so. And just like those demonic capitalists, I got a kick out of procuring a big-ticket item, such as a car with that wonderful new car smell.

So how did I fall so deeply into the progressive chimera? Given that I am (I hope) an intelligent person, with the potential to see the light, why did I drink the Kool-Aid for so long? In the service of shedding some light on our current occupiers, I offer the following observations:

Monkey see, monkey do: Leftists follow the leader. Since most progressives believe the anti-capitalist nonsense, the majority will follow in lock step. In liberal areas, there is groupthink -- cult-like behavior, where people must chant the same old tired mantras. To step out of line will undoubtedly bring social condemnation and shunning.

Indoctrination: While I thought I was an independent thinker, it never occurred to me to look outside the moveon.org box. All of my media was leftist; the so-called independent bookstores (the ones that celebrate "Banned Books Week") ban conservative books. So while Noam Chomsky is always welcome to give a book reading, Ann Coulter would never be invited within 50 miles of here.

The programming is particularly acute in the schools. In Berkeley, we have Malcolm X Elementary School and Malcolm X Park. Just to make sure that the kiddies get the message to emulate Mr. X, public school students (and all city employees) get Malcolm X's birthday off (same with Indigenous People's Day, aka Columbus Day, and International Women's Day).

While most areas aren't so extreme, there are hard-core activists all over this nation's school systems with union jobs for life. It's not a coincidence that Bill Ayers is a tenured professor of education; he knew the power of brainwashing kids when knee-high. With youth and their parents subscribing to the Party Line, it's not difficult to lead the progressive sheep to slaughter.

Of course, leftists are badly misguided about what a revolution actually entails. They weren't told, for instance, that Che Guevara, whose handsome face is emblazoned on their fashionable t-shirts, was actually a psychotic killer. Che got such a thrill from watching executions that he had a picture window installed in his office, and had the butchery conducted below.

And then there's another historical fact that eludes our gullible revolutionaries. After a revolution, the activists and militants themselves often get offed. Of course this would be the case; why would the regime want troublemakers and insurrectionaries in the populace?

The Cool Factor: Obama was elected, in part, because he was viewed as cool (though most of us on the right saw him not as cool, but cold). Being a leftist/revolutionary/radical type is viewed as hip and trendy. Simply consult your thesaurus to see the negative words associated with being a "conservative" versus a "liberal." And aren't we a society enamored by anything and anyone who is considered cool?

Alienation and the Search for Meaning: People of all ages, but particularly youth, have an inherent need to find meaning. With spirituality shunned, people look to the secular religion of progressivism to fill the existential void. By fighting against "The Man," capitalism, and America, the radicals believe that they are good people who live lives of value in an otherwise nihilistic world.

An increasing number of people feel alienated in this culture. They are Americans, yet are told that America is bad. They may have a hunger for God, and yet turn away because believers are mocked.

This sense of alienation from God and country compels many people to look to political movements for their raison d'etre . Being leftists offers the lost souls a sense of belonging and identity.

60s Fever: There's a hunger to relive the 60s, even though the Hollywood, sanitized version didn't exactly happen. I've heard young people bemoan the fact that they were too young to enjoy San Francisco, adorned with flowers in their hair.

Of course, the Bay Area in the 60s was besieged by drug overdoses, rapes, the gangster Black Panthers, and radical terrorist bombings. But given that the Baby Boomers wax rhapsodic about the good-old days, both grey haired and youth take to the streets to relive a reality that never happened.

Delusion: The radicals misunderstand the nature of reality. They believe that life should be fair, that hierarchy and differences among people shouldn't exist. It is a form of delusion to embrace utopia and perfection in this human realm.

But, again, this secular society has trashed religion and deconstructed history, the realms of which would explain the way life works. Instead, people on the left live in a fantasy world; and they go ballistic on opponents because truth threatens their dreamworld.

Control: Occupying the streets allows participants to feel good about themselves, noble, as though they are saving the world. In contrast, it's a buzz kill to realize how little control one has over this life. To feel insignificant, like a little cog in the wheel, is depressing. How much more exciting to elevate oneself into the role of some revolutionary involved in a movement to radically transform America.

Generation Me: Scores of studies show the same thing: that today's youth are more narcissistic than ever before. While previous generations of the l8 to 24-year-old crowd prioritized family and meaning, today's young want six figures and they want it now. They have been raised to feel special and entitled, particularly those in supposedly disenfranchised groups (which, incidentally, is most of the American population). And if they have to take some of your hard earned dough to live the good life, no problemo.

Greed: Despite the leftists' lofty claims about fairness, isn't socialism all about greed, about coveting thy neighbor's house? Can't the essence of progressive politics be distilled to this: wanting money, money, and more money?

While those on the left profess to be anti-capitalists, they are the real capitalists. They are so preoccupied with capital, and envious of those who have it, that they want it through any means necessarily. Even billionaire Warren Buffet must be less obsessed with cash and the things it can buy than these love-of-money leftists.

The Need for a Scapegoat: Human beings know instinctively that there is both good and evil in the world. But the moral relativism inherent in liberal education tells people that everyone is good. When people are robbed of the knowledge of good and evil, they will create scapegoats.

Of course, Obama, Pelosi, and the left are masters at pointing fingers rightward, and insinuating that conservatives are racist/Nazi-like subhumans. Whenever there's a lunatic out of control somewhere in the world, the left impugns conservatives. It's no wonder that there's such anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and anti-conservative vitriol all over the airwaves. Not surprisingly, a mob mentality ensues, with angry, violent, and demonic mobs taking to the streets.

****

As for me, I somehow snapped out of my leftist trance a few years ago, and, since then, have realized that everything that I thought (and I mean everything) was wrong. I thank my lucky stars every day that I finally saw the light.

But will others wake up as well...will people get a grip and get a clue? Will they realize that while imperfect, capitalist America is the best around -- which is why so many people are desperate to become citizens here?

Sadly, I doubt it. I think that the indoctrination is way too far gone. Further, we have a President who will stop at nothing to keep the masses in an enraged, hypnotic trance.

The best we can do is to dislodge the militants from the streets and restore order. But more than this: we need to expel the number one militant, the one with the secret cabal of Czars and obvious disdain for the Constitution.

Because the biggest danger isn't Occupy Chicago or Occupy Wall Street -- it's Obama himself. What we're seeing is: "Occupy The White House."

Our greatest peril isn't the mobs on the streets of Manhattan; it's having a President who thinks he's above the law. It's having our head of state support violent insurrections here and abroad.

The United States doesn't need any more occupations; what we need is a new occupant in the White House. And hopefully, prayerfully, we will have a new one come next November.



To: Land Shark who wrote (633572)10/28/2011 12:50:33 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578531
 
From the sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini
ethnikoi.org

A decree by Khomeini ordered that girl prisoners who are virgins must be raped before execution, to prevent them from entering heaven.

A Guard conducts the rape the night before execution.

The next day, a marriage certificate is issued by a mullah, who sends it to the girl's family,
along with a box of chocolates as a wedding gift.

From the sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini
ethnikoi.org


A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby.
However, he should not penetrate vaginally, but sodomising the child is acceptable.

A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels
and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, but selling the meat to a neighbouring village is reasonable.



To: Land Shark who wrote (633572)11/7/2011 12:50:04 PM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578531
 
NCDC data shows that the contiguous USA has not warmed in the past decade, summers are cooler, winters are getting colder

More documentation of historical temperature alteration. I know you like to slink away after this stuff appears, Shark ... well, I'm not going to let you pretend you didn't see this:


Posted on November 5, 2011 by Anthony Watts

See update below: New comparison graph of US temperatures in 1999 to present added – quite an eye opener – Anthony

There’s been a lot of buzz and conflicting reports over what the BEST data actually says, especially about the last decade where we have dueling opinions on a “slowing down”, “leveling off”, “standstill”, or “slight rise” (depending on whose pronouncements you read) of global warming.

Here’s some media quotes that have been thrown about recently about the BEST preliminary data and preliminary results:

“‘We see no evidence of it [global warming] having slowed down,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. There was, he added, ‘no levelling off’.” – Dr. Richard Muller

In The Sunday Mail Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties:

‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’ - Dr. Judith Curry in The Sunday Mail

Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels in an essay at The GWPF wrote:

“The last ten years of the BEST data indeed show no statistically significant warming trend, no matter how you slice and dice them”. He adds: “Both records are in reasonable agreement about the length of time without a significant warming trend. In the CRU record it is 15.0 years. In the University of Alabama MSU it is 13.9, and in the Remote Sensing Systems version of the MSU it is 15.6 years. “

In the middle of all those quotes being bandied about, I get an email from Burt Rutan (yes THAT Burt Rutan) with a PDF slideshow titled Winter Trends in the United States in the Last Decade citing NCDC’s “climate at a glance” data. This is using the USHCN2 data, which we are told is the “best”, no pun intended. It had this interesting map of the USA for Winter Temperatures (December-February) by climate region on the first slide:



Hmmm, that’s a bit of a surprise for the steepness of those trend numbers. So I decided to expand and enhance that slide show by combining trend graphs and the map together, while also looking at other data (summer, annual). Here’s a breakdown for CONUS by region for Winter, Summer, and Annual comparisons. Click each image to enlarge to full size to view the graphs.

Winter temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that every region has a negative trend:



Summer temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that 5 of 9 regions have a negative summertime trend:



And finally here is the Annual yearly mean temperature trend for the last decade. Since 2011 is not yet complete for annual data (though is for Winter and Summer data), I’ve plotted the last decade available, from 2000-2010:



Only 1 of 9 regions has a positive decadal trend for the Annual mean temperature, the Northeast.

This data is from USHCN2, from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Note that I have not adjusted it or even self plotted it in any way. The output graphs and trend numbers are from NCDC’s publicly available “Climate At A Glance” database interface, and these can be fully replicated by anyone easily simply by going here and choosing “regions”:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html

I find the fact that summer temperatures were negative in five of 9 regions interesting. But most importantly, the trend for the CONUS for the past 10 years is not flat, but cooling.

The trend line for the contiguous lower 48 states looks like this for the same period when we plot the Annual mean temperature data for 2001-2010 (we can’t plot 2011 yet since the year isn’t complete):





And if we back it up a year, to 2000, so that we get ten full years, we get this:



So according the the National Climatic Data Center, it seems clear that for at least the last 10 years, there has been a cooling trend in the Annual mean temperature of the contiguous United States. Pat Michaels in his GWPF essay talks about 1996 :

A significant trend since these periods began is not going to emerge anytime soon. MSU temperatures are plummeting and are now below where they were at this time of the year in the 2008 La Nina. NOAA is predicting an extreme La Nina low in 2012. If the 1976-98 warming trend is re-established in 2013, post-1996 warming would not become significant until 2021.

So when you run the NCDC “climate at a glance” plotter from 1996 for the USA on Annual mean temperature data for the contiguous United States for 15 years of data, you get this, flatness:



Warming, for the USA seems pretty “stalled” to me in the last 10-15 years. Bear in mind that BEST uses the same data source for the USA, the USCHN2 data. Granted, this isn’t a standard 30 year climatology period we are examining, but the question about the last 10 years is still valid. “ Aerosol masking” has been the reason given by the Team. Blame China.

For the inevitable whining and claims of cherry picking that will come in comments, here’s the complete data set from NCDC plotted from 1895. I added the 1934 reference line in blue:



Interestingly, we’ve had only two years that exceeded 1934 for Annual mean temperature in the United States and they were El Niño related. 1998 and 2006 both had El Niño events.

While the United States is not the world, it does have some of the best weather data available, no pun intended. Given the NCDC data for CONUS, it certainly seems to me that warming has stalled for the United States in the last decade.

UPDATE: 11/06/2011 8AM PST

When I wrote the post above, I had concerns that the 1998 and 2006 peaks might not have actually exceeded 1934. I didn’t have the energy to explore the issue last night. This morning looking anew, I recalled the GISS Y2K debacle and recovered the graphs from Hansen’s 1999 press release. This was originally part of “Lights Out Upstairs” a guest post by Steve McIntyre on my old original blog. Just look at how much warmer 1934 was in 1999 than it is now. Much of this can be attributed to NCDC’s USHCN2 adjustments.

=============================================================

Steve wrote then:

In the NASA press release in 1999 , Hansen was very strongly for 1934. He said then:

The U.S. has warmed during the past century, but the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability.Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934.

This was illustrated with the following depiction of US temperature history, showing that 1934 was almost 0.6 deg C warmer than 1998.


From a Hansen 1999 News Release: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/fig1x.gif

However within only two years, this relationship had changed dramatically. In Hansen et al 2001 (referred to in the Lights On letter), 1934 and 1998 were in a virtual dead heat with 1934 in a slight lead. Hansen et al 2001 said

The U.S. annual (January-December) mean temperature is slightly warmer in 1934 than in 1998 in the GISS analysis (Plate 6)… the difference between 1934 and 1998 mean temperatures is a few hundredths of a degree.


From Hansen et al 2001 Plate 2. Note the change in relationship between 1934 and 1998.

Between 2001 and 2007, for some reason, as noted above, the ranks changed slightly with 1998 creeping into a slight lead.

The main reason for the changes were the incorporation of an additional layer of USHCN adjustments by Karl et al overlaying the time-of-observation adjustments already incorporated into Hansen et al 1999. Indeed, the validity and statistical justification of these USHCN adjustments is an important outstanding issue.

============================================================

I’ve prepared a before and after graph using the CONUS values from GISS in 1999 and in 2011 (today).



GISS writes now of the bottom figure:

Annual Mean Temperature Change in the United States

Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth’s surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean. [This is an update of Figure 6 in Hansen et al. (1999).]

Also available as PDF, or Postscript. Also available are tabular data.

So clearly, the two graphs are linked, and 1998 and 1934 have swapped positions for the “warmest year”. 1934 went down by about 0.3°C while 1998 went up by about 0.4°C for a total of about 0.7°C.

And they wonder why we don’t trust the surface temperature data.

In fairness, most of this is the fault of NCDC’s Karl, Menne, and Peterson, who have applied new adjustments in the form of USHCN2 (for US data) and GHCN3 (to global data). These adjustments are the primary source of this revisionism. As Steve McIntyre often says: “You have to watch the pea under the thimble with these guys”.

wattsupwiththat.com



To: Land Shark who wrote (633572)11/10/2011 2:03:41 PM
From: Brumar89  Respond to of 1578531
 
Global warming could kill 4.5B people by 2012:


Only 52 days left, get on with the dying already
Posted on November 10, 2011 by Anthony Watts

Back in January 2007, we were admonished:

“…you should remember this moment when you learned about this feedback loop-it is an existencial turning point in your life. “

http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2007/01/09/global-warming-doomsday-45-billion-dead-by-2012/

Yes, I remember, only too well. In fact, here’s a reminder:



click image for original story

The paper's site puts todays date on it... the article originally was published in 2007. As silly then as now.

Get your life in order people. The big planet killing fart is coming, sometime in the next 52 days. I’ve sent an email to the editor using the contact page for this newspaper, asking if they’ll have live coverage.



h/t to The Daily Bayonet

Meanwhile, cooler heads are asking about whether climate change is dangerous at all.

wattsupwiththat.com