Archive for the ‘Bad Ideas’ Category
Posted by pwl on May 25, 2011
These climate scientists bust a move violating the scientific method and the philosophy of science with their CO2 Climate Doomsday Rapture Prophetic rhetoric.
The amazing thing is that they seem to be utterly oblivious to the ethical violations of the scientific method they are committing against the philosophy of science. Their smug arrogance isn’t even he worst part.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Avoiding Quesitons, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Doomsday Claim, Double Yikes!!, Eco-Junk Science Terrorists, Eco-zombie Terrorists, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Insanity beyond Insanity, Proofs Needed, Scams, The Stupid It Burns!!!, They got the math wrong!, Video, Yeah Right, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on January 15, 2010
The profound deep arrogance of man is revealed in the self imposed delusional mythological belief systems from the Bronze Ages. Many people, purportedly the vast majority of people on Earth, believe that the universe was created for man. How arrogant. How sad. The cartoon above says it well.
Let’s get it through our thick skulls. The universe wasn’t created for human beings. We simple evolved here fighting and clawing our way from sub-cellular life to multi-cellular all the way up to human being. To say that the universe was created for us is so insulting to our ancestors that it isn’t funny- it does them a deep disrespect for it says that their struggle in the continuous chain of life from them to us was unnecessary and make believe just to suit the whims of some arrogant God that want’s to toy with us for his/her/it’s own designs.
Anyone who truly gets the notion of freedom and independence must reject the notions of arrogance implied and supported by the profoundly horrific self conceited notion that the universe was created for us.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Baby that became Zombie Jesus, Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Complex Systems, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science over Propaganada | 2 Comments »
Posted by pwl on January 5, 2010
On Jan 1st, 2010 the British Columbia Cell Phone and electronic device ban came into effect.
This cell phone ban really isn’t about making the roads any safer. It’s really just about ICBC having an easier time to prosecute people so that they don’t have to do any actual hard work of proving driver distraction in each case as they did last week.
Now ICBC can just magically say that you were distracted without having to actually prove it in your case. That makes their job so much easier that it’s not funny. As a bonus ICBC won’t have to pay for your claim since you’re guilty of a crime by default if you were using a device in your car.
One reason that this law is unconstitutional is that in Canada we have the right to be presumed innocent until we are proven guilty (“11(d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty …”). This cell phone ban attempts to by pass this important constitutional protection and place the burden upon us saying that we are guilty of diminished capacity just because we were using a cell phone in our hands rather than in a speaker mode. In effect we’ll have to prove that were are not guilty of the assumed crime of diminished capacity or loss of focus or however they magically word it in sly tongued legalese.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Scams, Damn it!, Bad Science Attitude, Double Yikes!!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Bad Ideas, Total Control Over Our Lives, Hard Science Required, Vehicles, The End is Nigh, Science over Propaganada, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Rational Thinking, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Get some perspective people, Eeek!, Watching the Watchers, Police State Insanity, Insanity beyond Insanity, Yikes! The sky really is falling!, British Columbia ICBC Police State | 3 Comments »
Posted by pwl on January 4, 2010
The CULT of the Police State deepens in a disturbing way in British Columbia, Canada as of 1 Jan 2010.
It’s going to take a pretty creative excuse to get out of a ticket for violating B.C.’s new distracted driver law.
Effective Jan. 1, anyone caught holding a cell phone, PDA, portable music player or other electronic device while operating a motor vehicle is eligible for a $167 ticket. If the cop can prove you were actually using it, expect three demerit points, too.
That means simply fidgeting with a portable music player while stopped at a light is now against the law, according to RCMP Staff Sgt. Al Dengis, head of Central Okanagan Traffic Services.
“All the police are required to establish is that the individual was holding onto an electronic device,” he said.
Cops don’t have to prove that the device was in use or even on at the time of the offence.
“We simply have to show that you were driving the vehicle and holding the device,” Dengis explained.
- Just holding a cell phone while behind the wheel is now against the law
This anti-cell phone law is unconstitutional, plain and simple for it assumes that one had diminished capacity when one is using a cell phone or other device in the car while driving. I’d like them to prove that I had diminished capacity even once while using a cell phone at any time for the past two decades.
Sure if a person is in an accident and it can be shown that a cell phone or a distraction was occurring and that that caused the accident that is one thing and the proper burden of proof of a contributing factor.
Failing an actual problem, such as an accident, it is well neigh impossible for them to prove that a driver has “diminished capacity” just because they were using a cell phone. It’s not like the case of alcohol.
However, to assume we are all guilty of diminished capacity just for holding a device or using a cell phone while driving is insanity and fails the burden of proof of guilt [that is required for the government to prove].
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Ethics in Science, Proofs Needed, Politics, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Damn it!, Double Yikes!!, 1984, Bad Science, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Bad Ideas, Total Control Over Our Lives, Hard Science Required, Canadians, The Sky Is Falling, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Science over Propaganada, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Rational Thinking, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Get some perspective people, Eeek!, Watching the Watchers, Police State Insanity, Insanity beyond Insanity, Yikes! The sky really is falling!, British Columbia ICBC Police State | 9 Comments »
Posted by pwl on November 5, 2009
All belief is religion as belief isn’t based upon verifiable knowledge.
“A United Kingdom court has ruled that a man can take his employer to court on the grounds that he was discriminated against because of his views on climate change. …
Mr Nicholson successfully argued that his moral values about the environment should be recognised under the same laws that protect religious beliefs.
In the landmark ruling, Justice Michael Burton said that a belief in man-made climate change is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the religion and belief regulations.” Beliefs on climate like Religion, court rules
The word “belief” is a problematic word with so many definitions that you have to pretty much define what you mean either by the context or by direction definition.
Generally when I’m down on the word belief I specifically mean “religious belief” or “supernatural belief” and not a belief that my car is still parked where it is.
I don’t think it’s responsible to say that “I believe in Newton’s Gravity Theory” as to use the word belief to talk about facts mis-communicates to the masses of people out there without scientific training. It’s better to use other words. Your “belief” that letting go of a stone has nothing to do with whether or not the stone falls.
Common uses of belief basically mean that you don’t know or don’t have evidence and that you assume it is true anyway. Since you do have evidence that dropping a stone on earth will have it fall (unless it’s otherwise supported or blocked) using the word belief is a mistake. One instead should say “I know that when I let go of a stone at chest level, it will fall (assuming that it’s not supported or blocked in some other manner).” This has clarity.
It is a big mistake for Richard Dawkins to be using the word belief the way he does with regards to scientific knowledge. He should be more careful and define his terms more precisely when talking about scientific knowledge and what is know and what isn’t since the religious masses use the word belief differently.
Sure people have a “belief” that X person will be a good political leader, but that is an entirely different category and meaning of belief than “belief that god exists” which is a statement that has no evidence and will never have any evidence in all probability not even mentioning all the evidence against the possibility of any gods existing.
As for climate change caused by man the science isn’t settled and if you think it is that is your “belief” and not a valid scientific statement. The more I learn the more I learn that we don’t yet have conclusive answers and that politics of extreme environmentalism started it and now that mainstream politicians have gotten into the act it’s now even more highly suspect. So I’d say show the evidence in a context where it can be audited by anyone which means showing all the data, raw and manipulated, detailed and comprehensive explanations for the manipulations, the statistics methods involved and why they were chosen, the software and the data used to create the graphs, all the scientists notes, photographs, and other materials used in the preparation of all the science papers. It’s clear that climate scientists (and others) have not been up to the standards of other fields and that all publically funded science needs to have it’s standards of openness and auditability raised.
I’m a very strong show me the hard evidence guy. Belief has no place in science nor in the communication of science nor in the science education process unless it specifically means “we think it could be true or false but we don’t just know yet”.
Believing that murder is wrong is a statement of one’s moral values and the word belief is often used although I’d question it’s use there. I’d not say it that way. I’d rather be more specific and say that “Murder is wrong because human life is valuable.”
Is saying “gravity sucks” a statement of “belief” or is it a succinct statement of the known laws of Gravity? I pick the latter.
“The relationship between belief and knowledge is that a belief is knowledge if the belief is true, and if the believer has a justification (reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance) for believing it is true. … Later epistemologists have questioned the “justified true belief” definition, and some philosophers have questioned whether “belief” is a useful notion at all.” – wikipedia
So “belief” is shaky ground at best, and as such it’s best to avoid using it when speaking generally about science or anything that is a statement of objective reality or it’s nature. I also use it carefully. My main use is in talking about the belief and faith stricken members of society.
Is that my belief? No, it’s a precautionary guidance principle based on knowledge gained from far too many conversations with the belief stricken who set well placed linguistic and philosophical traps.
Posted in Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Philosophy, Politics, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada | 1 Comment »
Posted by pwl on July 31, 2009
“Sometimes we forget that not all numbers are the same. This becomes very apparent in dealing with floating point numbers in parallel computing. … Floating numbers are not associative or distributive. … The more cores programmers run their parallelized code on, the more ways operations can be interleaved and the more challenges programmers face.” – Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg, Intel
As if it’s climate science is not bad enough with intentionally corrupt or incompetently done statistics it turns out that climate models may be based upon computer programs with serious math flaws: the limits of the floating point and double precision floating point data types can produce incorrect results since “Floating Point Numbers Aren’t Real Numbers!” they are data types with limited precision. It gets even worse than that, when supposedly good programs are transformed into massively parallel programs with N threads of execution the results can vary with the number of threads chosen to run the program! Of course in climate science N can be 2 or 4 threads on a single multi-core machine but it can also be 1,000+ using GPGPUs or server compute farms.
Have the climate model programs been vetted to ensure mathematical accuracy? Is there a set of test cases that validate it after new changes have been made to the climate models? Do the test cases cover all the calculations in the climate model software? How do we know the answers are even accurate mathematically? (Of course that’s not even asking how do we know the model is relevant but this inquiry is not into relevancy it’s into accuracy of the calculations, whatever they happen to be, in climate models).
“The more cores programmers run their parallelized code on, the more ways operations can be interleaved and the more challenges programmers face. Parallel programmers must deal with a host of issues peculiar to parallel programs such as synchronization, protecting shared variables, and finding thread safe versions of common math routines (such as random number generation). One of the most subtle problems faced by the parallel programmer, however, arises from the properties of floating point numbers. Floating point numbers are the same in serial and parallel computations, of course, but when a program executes in parallel, special features of these numbers are more likely to impact your results.” – Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg, Intel, in “Parallelization and Floating Point Numbers“
One aspect of models in science and engineering that involve calculations using the “floating point number format” is that Floating Point numbers are NOT REAL NUMBERS they are limited precision approximations of Real Numbers and as such they have their limits often caused by rounding which results in Floating Point numbers not being associative, in other words the order matters!!! What happens in science and engineering calculations on computers using Float 32 or Double floats (64 bits) especially when scaling massive numbers of computations to multiple threads on your multiple cores or on thousands of processor nodes in super computers or on GPGPU (general purpose graphics processing units) is that you get the wrong answers due to the miss use of these floating point data types.
You can easily generate numbers that don’t fit into the floating point format, and thus you produce answers from the basic arithmetic operations that don’t fit into a floating point format. In other words, the floating point numbers when operated on by the basic arithmetic operations do not constitute a closed set.
The impact of this is significant. Floating numbers are not associative or distributive. So,
A * (C * B) ≠ (A * C) * B and
A * (B + C) ≠ A * B + A * C
[Obviously the sentence is missing something here, most likely the two equations do not produce the same answers! -pwl]
This means that as you change the order of a long sequence of arithmetic operations, you can generate different answers. Mathematically with real numbers, the answers can’t depend on the order of the operations (for commutative operations) or the way they are grouped together (associatively). But with floating point numbers, if you interleave the operations in different ways, you get different results.
Here’s a good test to demonstrate the implications of this behavior by floating point numbers:
1. Fill 2 arrays each with 10000 random values between 0.0 and 1.0.
2. Shift one up by 100 and shift the other down by 0.001.
3. Mix the arrays together, sum them, and subtract a large number (500000).
Here are the results run on 1, 2, and 4 threads.
1 thread computes 170.968750
2 threads computes 171.968750
4 threads computes 172.750000
Which one of these numbers is correct, the 1-thread, 2-thread, or 4-thread value? Are any of these the true value? Would you consider that with 4 threads, the answer is correct and the others wrong? Or with 1 thread?
This is not a trick question, nor is its goal to make programmers look silly. Developers are smart people. But, many programmers steeped in sequential programming for so many years make the assumption that there is only one right answer for their algorithm. After all, their code has always delivered the same answer every time it was run. When you consider the above example, however, all the answers are equally correct. To pick one arbitrarily and call it right and the others wrong is completely unjustified.
Wait there is more! This is quite shocking isn’t it? What you were taught in math class isn’t the way that computers do math! Yikes. Most computer scientists are not aware of this problem as most never encounter it in their careers, or don’t know that it’s a problem that is happening right under their noses. Scary.
By mixing the numbers as this example does, it creates a pathological situation designed to maximize problems due to round off error. The test mixes very large and very small numbers together. The arithmetic unit aligns the numbers before adding them, which, given the large difference in their absolute magnitudes, all but guarantees that we’ll loose bits of precision in the process.
As the number of threads changes, the combinations of numbers being added also changes. With all the roundoff errors, as the way these numbers are combined changes, the way roundoff error is accumulated also keeps changing. Thus, the answers change.
So which answer is correct? The algorithm for adding them together is unstable. If you carefully add the numbers together so large numbers add with large numbers and small numbers add with small numbers, and then add the “large_set_sum” to the “small_set_sum”, you get a numerically stable result. The answer in this case is 177.750. Note that the test answers in every case considerably vary from the stable method of obtaining the answer.
Note also that, with a serial algorithm, you’d never know there was a problem. Only as the thread count grows and the answers change, does the instability of the algorithm become obvious. It’s apparent the problem is not in the compiler or even the program. The problem is with the numerical instability of the algorithm. And it’s only revealed by going to multiple threads.
The video with Tim Mattson explains it well.
Are you getting different numbers for calculations as you vary the number of threads? Your algorithm may be incorrect. Real numbers are nice; floating numbers are not nice. Floating numbers are not a closed set, the overflow bits need to be rounded and that can change the results of a calculation. Tim discusses how to work with floating point numbers and resources available to help in the Intel Math Kernel Libraries.
In the engineering applications that I’ve worked on for civil engineering of bridges we found that Double Precision Floating Point Numbers at 64 bits was simply not enough accuracy. We were able to use 80bit Extended Double Precision Floating Point numbers supported by the 8087 math coprocessor in the Intel line of chips. Even though the extended precision covered most of the cases that Double Precision didn’t there were a few cases where we had to adjust the order of our computations to ensure that we didn’t overflow the precision limits of the computation of the extended 80bit math! As you can imagine errors in bridge calculations are rather critical to life and limb.
The same is true in the Climate Models, lives and treasure both depend on correct math. The science fails when the math is wrong. Have they been vetted for numeric accuracy? How do we know that? Have test cases been written that test these limits in the climate model programs?
The same applies to random numbers in computers, they are not real random numbers either. As Tim Mattson says “We now know that god does play dice but that computers can’t!” (paraphrased). Random numbers are important in climate models since the climate is in inherently a system with randomness being generated from within. See Wolfram’s A New Kind of Science.
Computers cannot make truly random numbers. For statistical algorithms requiring random numbers, developers need to be careful in parallel code to avoid overlapping sequences from random number generators. Tim discusses different methods to use random number generators – including using independent generators for each thread and the “leap frog method” – to produce “pseudo random numbers” for statistical algorithms that work in parallel code.
Very interesting and important topic to any system that depends upon parallel computations being correct to protect limb, life and treasure.
Thanks to Intel, Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg for this important information.
Posted in Awesome, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Damn it!, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows | 1 Comment »
Posted by pwl on July 3, 2009
The extremely high dilutions in homeopathy have been a main point of criticism. Homeopaths believe that the methodical dilution of a substance, beginning with a 10% or lower solution and working downwards, with shaking after each dilution, produces a therapeutically active “remedy”, in contrast to therapeutically inert water. However, homeopathic remedies are usually diluted to the point where there are no molecules from the original solution left in a dose of the final remedy. Since even the longest-lived noncovalent structures in liquid water at room temperature are only stable for a few picoseconds, critics have concluded that any effect that might have been present from the original substance can no longer exist. No evidence of stable clusters of water molecules was found when homeopathic remedies were studied using NMR.
Furthermore, since water will have been in contact with millions of different substances throughout its history, critics point out that any glass of water is therefore an extreme dilution of almost any conceivable substance, and so by drinking water one would, according to homeopathic principles, receive treatment for every imaginable condition.
Practitioners of homeopathy contend that higher dilutions (fewer potential molecules in each dose) result in stronger medicinal effects. This idea is inconsistent with the observed dose-response relationships of conventional drugs, where the effects are dependent on the concentration of the active ingredient in the body. This dose-response relationship has been confirmed in multitudinous experiments on organisms as diverse as nematodes, rats, and humans.
Physicist Robert L. Park, former executive director of the American Physical Society, has noted that
“since the least amount of a substance in a solution is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of the original substance dissolved in a minimum of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth.”
Park has also noted that “to expect to get even one molecule of the ‘medicinal’ substance allegedly present in 30X pills, it would be necessary to take some two billion of them, which would total about a thousand tons of lactose plus whatever impurities the lactose contained“.
The laws of chemistry state that there is a limit to the dilution that can be made without losing the original substance altogether. This limit, which is related to Avogadro’s number, is roughly equal to homeopathic potencies of 12C or 24X (1 part in 1024).
Killing your child with the delusional beliefs of Homeopathy:
Going to jail for killing your child with the delusional beliefs of Homeopathy:
Save yourself from homeopathy!
Posted in Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Biology, Conspiracy Theory, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Fun, Hard Science Required, Health, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on June 17, 2009
On August 7, 1974, shortly after 7:15 a.m., Petit stepped off the South Tower and onto his 3/4″ 6×19 IWRC (independent wire rope core ) steel cable. The 24-year-old Petit made eight crossings between the mostly finished towers, a quarter mile above the sidewalks of Manhattan, in an event that lasted about 45 minutes. During that time, in addition to walking, he sat on the wire, gave knee salute and, while lying on the wire, spoke with a gull circling above his head.
Port Authority Police Department Sgt. Charles Daniels, who was dispatched to the roof to bring Petit down, later reported his experience:
I observed the tightrope ‘dancer’—because you couldn’t call him a ‘walker’—approximately halfway between the two towers. And upon seeing us he started to smile and laugh and he started going into a dancing routine on the high wire….And when he got to the building we asked him to get off the high wire but instead he turned around and ran back out into the middle….He was bouncing up and down. His feet were actually leaving the wire and then he would resettle back on the wire again….Unbelievable really….[E]verybody was spellbound in the watching of it.
Petit was warned by his friend on the South Tower that a police helicopter would come to pick him off the wire unless he got off. Rain had begun to fall, and Petit decided he had taken enough risks, so he decided to give himself up to the police waiting for him on the South Tower. He was arrested once he stepped off the wire. Provoked by his taunting behaviour while on the wire, police handcuffed him behind his back and roughly pushed him down a flight of stairs. This he later described as the most dangerous part of the stunt.
His audacious high wire performance made headlines around the world. When asked why he did the stunt, Petit would say “When I see three oranges, I juggle; when I see two towers, I walk.”
He crossed EIGHT TIMES and danced while doing it!!! You’re kidding right? Nope…
Very amazing. Beyond words amazing. Indelible WOW!
A true tribute.
Man on Wire is an Academy Award-winning 2008 documentary film directed by James Marsh. The film chronicles Philippe Petit’s 1974 high-wire walk between the Twin Towers of New York’s World Trade Center. It is based on Philippe Petit’s book, To Reach the Clouds, recently released in paperback with the new title Man on Wire. The title of the movie is taken from the police report that led to the arrest (and later release) of Petit, whose performance had lasted for almost one hour. The film is crafted like a heist film, presenting rare footage of the preparations for the event and still photographs of the walk, alongside reenactments (with Paul McGill as the young Petit) and present-day interviews with the participants.
What in your life gets you to take risks and get to your edge of peak performance?
Philippe Petit (born August 13, 1949) is a French high wire artist who gained fame for his high-wire walk between the Twin Towers (WTC) in New York City on August 7, 1974. For his feat (that he referred to as “le coup” ), he used a 450-pound (200 kg) cable and a custom-made 26-foot (7.9 m) long, 55-pound (25 kg) balancing pole.
Tight-rope walker, unicyclist, magician and pantomime artist, Petit was also one of the earliest modern day street jugglers in Paris, having begun his career in 1968. He juggled and worked on a slack rope with regularity in Washington Square Park in New York City in the early 1970s. Other famous structures he has used for tightrope walks include Notre Dame de Paris, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Louisiana Superdome, the Hennepin County Government Center, and between the Palais de Chaillot and the Eiffel Tower.
The documentary film Man on Wire by UK director James Marsh, about Petit’s 1974 WTC performance, won both the World Cinema Jury and Audience awards at the Sundance Film Festival 2008. The film also won awards at the 2008 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival in Durham, N.C. and won the Academy Award for Best Documentary.
Petit is one of the Artists-in-Residence at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City. He currently lives in Woodstock, New York.
Learning to tight rope walk. Not as easy as Petit makes it look.
Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Ideas, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Hard Science, Health, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Lawn Chair Larry, Majestic Universe, Man on Wire, Philosophy, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, The End is Nigh, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 3 Comments »
Posted by pwl on May 27, 2009
An increase in pale surfaces would help to contain climate change both by reflecting more solar radiation into space and by reducing the amount of energy needed to keep buildings cool by air-conditioning. Since 2005 California has required all flat roofs on commercial buildings to be white and Georgia and Florida give incentives to owners who install white or light-colored roofs. Put another way, boosting how much urban rooftops reflect would be a one-time carbon-offset equivalent to preventing 44 billion tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere. ‘For the first time, we’re equating the value of reflective roof surfaces and CO2 reduction,’ says Dr. Hashem Akbari. ‘This does not make the problem of global warming go away. But we can buy ourselves some time.’”
What? The AGW (anthropogenic global warming) hypothesis says that the radiation is being kept IN by the C02 in the atmosphere… thus it matters not that it’s reflected back into space by white surfaces on the SURFACE of the Earth SINCE they ARE well within and UNDER the green house gas layers of the atmosphere (not counting the painting of mount everest et. al.)! Dah!
What kind of bizarro world is this where the radiation can be reflected back and NOT be stopped by the VERY C02 (and other) GREEN HOUSE GASES that are the problem?
I guess we’re going to use magic white paint to tell the photons that hit the magic white roofs that they are special photons and that they have a pass to magically not be blocked by the green house gases in the atmosphere on their way out.
Now that’s a good business to be in, selling magic white paint.
It is the height of nonsense coming out of Chu’s brain as you can’t have it both ways there Steve and Al, either the green house gasses keep the radiation trapped in OR they don’t! Which will it be?
If the green house gasses can’t keep the heat radiation in then it follows that AWG is now proven false by Chu’s statement.
If the green house gases do keep in the heat radiation then AWG might have some tiny probability of being true AND Steven Chu’s been proven an idiot for wanting to paint the world a 1984 gray.
I don’t know about you but in Canada we like it toasty thus darker colors for buildings are better to keep it warm in the winter and use less energy for heating.
White buildings in the southern regions closer to the equator make sense to keep the buildings cooler in the heat that is there most of the time.
Saving the use of energy makes a lot of sense but why confuse the issue with bad science and terrible environmental notions that this somehow has to do with the sketchy AWG hypothesis?
It’s also nice to Chu to finally acknowledge that the Sun does in fact play a role in heating the earth.
Interesting how mind numbingly stupid this notion as presented by Chu is.
Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Belief Stricken, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, TerrorForming Earth, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling | 2 Comments »
Posted by pwl on April 14, 2009
Even people who believe in Darwin can have delusional beliefs such as this Christian narrator of this BBC show “Did Darwin Kill God?”. Of course it does, it’s the last nail in the cross!
WARNING DELUSIONAL MATERIAL PRELEVANT IN THIS SERIES OF VIDEOS!!! DON’T LET YOUR BRAIN FALL OUT OF YOUR HEAD WITH THESE CRAZY DELUSIONAL BELIEFS OF GOD.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Baby that became Zombie Jesus, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Biology, Charles Darwin, Complex Systems, Do Not Click At Work, Double Yikes!!, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invaders from Earth, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Live Brains!, Majestic Universe, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Really Funny, Religion, Scams, Some Intelligent Designer, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Yikes!, Zombie Jesus | 2 Comments »
Posted by pwl on April 12, 2009
Posted in Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Philosophy, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Religion, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Some Intelligent Designer, Video, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on April 4, 2009
Posted in Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Belief Stricken, Biology, Business, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Health, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Philosophy, Politics, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Scams, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 31, 2009
Posted in Awesome, Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Bill Maher, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Religion | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 31, 2009
A really great series of videos that hit back slicing and dicing the silly inane beliefs of creationists with hard hitting science. As someone with a sister and brother in law who are young earth rapture creationist preachers this series of videos is excellent potential deprogramming materials for the creationist delusional insanity. Enjoy.
These videos were made for the communal and greater good. All these videos are copyright free for educational purposes, feel free to mirror these videos with or without accreditation. Part of a series of videos exposing the funny stupidity of creationists and why they deserve to be laughed at. In each case the creationist statements are shown to be outrageously stupid by even the most rudimentary knowledge of science. Creationist are tackled at every level from the scientific illiterates like venomfangx who want to play in the scientific arena but don’t even understand the words they use, to convicted fraudsters like Kent Hovind who abuse the scientifical illiteracy of people like venomfangx to dupe them out of money. An enterprise which is clearly very successful as merely the tax Hovind didn’t pay was about a million dollars. Hovind himself has no discernible academic education, and gets by solely on using his confident delivery of scientific terms to convince his audiences that he knows what hes talking about. Then of course there are the professional such as the Discovery Institute, the hub and founders of the Intelligent design movement. After the humiliating rout of ID in court where it was found that ‘ID is not science’, and that ‘ID is only a relabelling of creationism’ the Discovery Institute do not utter the word once in their latest promotional video. Instead they now have decided to ‘teach the controversy’ which is an irony as they are the only people who disagree with evolution. What they are really asking is not to teach the controversy, but to teach their views, which are supported by neither research or evidence, in schools.
Any video with nuclear explosions gets headlined on the first page and has my blessing!
Many more parts follow!
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Awesome, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Belief Stricken, Biology, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Majestic Universe, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Really Funny, Religion, Science Education, Science over Propaganada | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 29, 2009
Thanks again for your insight Jesus and Mo.
Posted in Baby that became Zombie Jesus, Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Fun, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Really Funny, Religion, Some Intelligent Designer, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 14, 2009
Michael Ruse vs William Dembski on intelligent design. For more information read: “Debating Design” with essays demonstrating the intellectual hollownes of intelligent design.
“Are you seriously suggesting that we’re some sort of lab experiment of some alien phd student?” ~ Michael Ruse
When you make the argument that Life and even the Universe were created by an Intelligent Designer (aka god or gods or your invisible friend) you are making an assertion that a complex being designed us lesser beings and the Universe. This of course begs the question, “who designed the Intelligent Designer?” Until you can answer that you’re simply using your hand on your private parts for self gratification. No serious discussion can really proceed until that question is addressed.
Posted in Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Religion, Science Education, Video, Yikes!, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 12, 2009
“It’s all very well to say that the stork delivers the baby, but who delivers the Stork?” – Richard Dawkins, 2009
“e=mc^(2+TheHandOfGOD). Since TheHANDofGOD is zero this equation is valid!” – pwl
This is Richard Dawkins’ special introduction to his lecture at the University of Oklahoma on March 6th, 2009.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Biology, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Politics, Religion, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »
Posted by pwl on March 8, 2009
You’ve got to hear their promo video. Eeeek, it’s corporate double speak beyond imagination.
“In an effort to transition to a sustainable economy the planetary skin concept proposes a unifying approach to monitoring, measuring, and managing rural environments, rural to urban interconnects, and urban environments. Planetary Skin unifies a distributed nervous system of networked ground, sea, air and space based sensors, machines, and humans all into a cognitive decision space for trusted communities.” – Planetary Skin Promo Video
Yeah, and just who is in that “trusted community”? Not you or I that is for sure.
“Yikes! Their video is corporate government enviro-mental double speak gone wild and crazy! Big Brother will be implemented to enforce the bogus climate change politics of the likes of Al Gore! Yikes!!! Run for the hills, oh wait, Cisco is there with their planetary skin sensors monitoring you! The holier than thou crowd can control swarm after you to correct your 4% exhale of Carbon Dioxide in your breath foot print! They are after you since you didn’t get your lungs downgraded to 1% carbon exhales!
Planetary Skin is no less that the Total Information Awareness Grid/Matrix needed for the USA to combine with their Flying Death Machines to Control the World with the Threat of Death at Any Moment From the SkyNet.
Let’s hope the skin gets a rash.”
Very Scary: “Plantetary skin plays an active role…” in controlling the planet! Yikes.
NASA and Cisco Systems Inc. are developing “Planetary Skin” — a marriage of satellites, land sensors and the Internet — to capture, analyze and interpret global environmental data. Under terms of an agreement announced during a Capitol Hill climate summit today, NASA and Cisco (Nasdaq: CSCO) will develop the online collaborative platform to process data from satellite, airborne and sea- and land-based sensors around the globe.
The goal is to translate the data into information that governments and businesses can use to mitigate and adapt to climate change and manage energy and natural resources more effectively, NASA and Cisco officials explained in interviews.
“There are a lot of data out there, but we have to turn that into information,” explained S. Pete Worden, director of NASA’s Ames Research Center. “What we are trying to do is use Cisco’s expertise in data handling, put our data in there and explain what’s really going on in the rainforests.”
Posted in 1984, Bad Ideas, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Ethics in Science, Politics, Scams, SkyNet Battlefield Earth, TerrorForming Earth, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »