April 28, 2011

I think the end of civilization must be near

LOS ANGELES -- A savage beating by two men outside Dodger Stadium left a San Francisco Giants fan in a medically-induced coma as police on Saturday urged any witnesses to help identify the attackers.
The assault after Thursday's season opener between the Los Angeles Dodgers and the rival Giants left a 42-year-old paramedic from Santa Cruz in critical but stable condition.
Police released composite sketches of the two suspects, who were wearing Dodgers clothing.

The two suspects cursed and taunted three men in Giants gear as thousands of fans left the stadium after the 2-1 Dodger victory, Detective T.J. Moore said.
The Giants fans ran and two got away, but the assailants caught up to one in the parking lot, struck him on the back of the head and as he fell, he hit his head on the asphalt, Moore said.
Both attackers then kicked the victim, then ran, Moore said. They fled in a four-door sedan driven by a woman with a boy, Moore said.
The victim's friends returned and found him on the ground.

August 24, 2010

One of the Horsemen of the Apocolypse has Arrived

"Jersey Shore" Star Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino Set To Earn $5 Million In 2010

As the second season of MTV's hit show "Jersey Shore" continues to be the biggest ratings draw for the network in seven years, it's breakout star Sorrentino (a.k.a. The Situation) has jumped at the opportunity to capitalize on his fame. By year's end, Sorrentino stands to earn more than $5 million, according to published reports.
A source familiar with his finances told The Hollywood Reporter that by the end of the year the 29-year-old stands to earn more than $5 million.
"We are really excited about all the opportunities coming Mike's way," said Sorrentino's manager, Mike Petolino of Gotham Entertainment. "He has been able to secure many endorsement deals, business opportunities and additional television offers based on the success of the show. Our goal has always been to try to build a brand if the situation presented itself."

October 09, 2009

I never thought I would agree with terrorists...

Obama wins Noblel Peace Prize

"Very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the committee said in a citation."

Who new the key to peace was hope?

"Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party in Pakistan, called the award an embarrassing "joke". "

I completely agree. How unfortunate for the past recipients deserving of this prize. It's just been rendered meaningless.

September 22, 2009

Global Cooling

Scientists pull an about face on global warming

By Lorne Gunter, For The Calgary HeraldSeptember 19, 2009


Imagine if Pope Benedict gave a speech saying the Catholic Church has had it wrong all these centuries; there is no reason priests shouldn't marry. That might generate the odd headline, no?

Or Jack Layton insisted that unions are ruining the economy by distorting wages and protecting unproductive workers.

When a leading proponent for one point of view suddenly starts batting for the other side, it's usually newsworthy.

So why was a speech last week by Prof. Mojib Latif of Germany's Leibniz Institute not given more prominence?

Latif is one of the leading climate modellers in the world. He is the recipient of several international climate-study prizes and a lead author for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He has contributed significantly to the IPCC's last two five-year reports that have stated unequivocally that man-made greenhouse emissions are causing the planet to warm dangerously.

Yet last week in Geneva, at the UN's World Climate Conference--an annual gathering of the so-called "scientific consensus" on man-made climate change --Latif conceded the Earth has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool."

The global warming theory has been based all along on the idea that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would absorb much of the greenhouse warming caused by a rise in man-made carbon dioxide, then they would let off that heat and warm the atmosphere and the land.
But as Latif pointed out, the Atlantic, and particularly the North Atlantic, has been cooling instead. And it looks set to continue a cooling phase for 10 to 20 more years.
"How much?" he wondered before the assembled delegates. "The jury is still out."
But it is increasingly clear that global warming is on hiatus for the time being. And that is not what the UN, the alarmist scientists or environmentalists predicted. For the past dozen years, since the Kyoto accords were signed in 1997, it has been beaten into our heads with the force and repetition of the rowing drum on a slave galley that the Earth is warming and will continue to warm rapidly through this century until we reach deadly temperatures around 2100.
While they deny it now, the facts to the contrary are staring them in the face: None of the alarmist drummers ever predicted anything like a 30-year pause in their apocalyptic scenario.
Latif says he expects warming to resume in 2020 or 2030.

In the past year, two other groups of scientists--one in Germany, the second in the United States--have come to the same conclusion: Warming is on hold, likely because of a cooling of the Earth's upper oceans, but it will resume.

But how is that knowable? How can Latif and the others state with certainty that after this long and unforeseen cooling, dangerous man-made heating will resume? They failed to observe the current cooling for years after it had begun, how then can their predictions for the resumption of dangerous warming be trusted?

My point is they cannot. It's true the supercomputer models Latif and other modellers rely on for their dire predictions are becoming more accurate. But getting the future correct is far trickier. Chances are some unforeseen future changes will throw the current predictions out of whack long before the forecast resumption of warming.

July 28, 2009

Bad Economists

There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen. Yet this difference is tremendous; for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the later consequences are disastrous, and vice versa. Whence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good that will be followed by a great evil to come, while the good economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.

-Frederic Bastiat, French economist (1801 - 1850)

July 23, 2009

BullSHIT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama said on Wednesday he realized Americans were skeptical about his healthcare overhaul, but that the country's economic recovery depended on implementing the $1 trillion plan.