Monday Message Board

Another Monday Message Board. Post comments on any topic. Civil discussion and no coarse language please. Side discussions and idees fixes to the sandpits, please. If you would like to receive my (hopefully) regular email news, please sign up using the following link


http://eepurl.com/dAv6sX You can also follow me on Twitter @JohnQuiggin, at my Facebook public page   and at my Economics in Two Lessons page

49 thoughts on “Monday Message Board

  1. @birdy

    “There is no such thing as climate FORCING”

    When it comes to catching up you’re about 120 years too late.

  2. No don’t be an idiot rog. I was on top of this matter from the start. This was way back in about 2005 that I was auditing this failed model. Climate forcing is not a real thing. Its directly a fantasy output of a failed model.

  3. “Anyway, this interesting paper seeks to debunk the notion that raising the minimum wage is economically harmful.”

    To the extent that this is true, it just goes to show how far out of balance our business ecology is. Too many mammoths and not enough earth worms.

  4. Oh I get where you are coming from. You are still in aether-denial. Okay then rog. Lets have your explanation of waves where nothing is waving. You are going to have to admit that the oligarchy played you for a real sucker with aether-denial. In what way did Michelson-Morely reinforce the doctrine of aether-denial? You will find that nothing they came up with showed that there could ever be a wave without a medium.

  5. There is no such thing as climate forcing. Its a misuse of the language in order to lock in a conclusion for which they have no evidence. And you cannot discuss it because you need to have honest data. Whereas there is an international conspiracy to rig the data.

    What you need is an honest CO2 record, and honest temperature record, then you need to relate the one to the other to show correlation, then you need to make a rational argument which implies causation. Then you need to work on it to see if you are right and can prove causation. They don’t get as far as step one. If you show them the CO2 record they will make excuses until it goes away.

    Also there is no anomaly for greenhouse to explain. It is said that the average temperature ought to be -18 degrees celsius whereas its 15 degrees celsius so they are claiming there is a 33 degrees anomaly to explain. This is ignorant nonsense and we know it cannot work because it doesn’t work for the moon. Quite apart from the fact that this is a leap to be making on a rotating oceanic planet, it is ignoring all the electrical energy coming from the sun in two forms.

    We get a solar wind and the solar wind is more strongly related to temperature than any other metric. Electricity is moving electrons or ions, proton wind can be thought of as an ion of hydrogen, so thats direct electricity hitting us. Added to that the electrical resistance of the aether is 377 Ohms. That is to say space (more correctly aether) is quite a strong resistor so the electrical energy built up in the suns corona builds up capacitance all the way between the suns Corona and the ionosphere. That voltage difference then has to work its way from the ionosphere to the deep earth, which is what drives all our weather and creates a lot of ambient heat. We know the 33 degrees story is nonsense because we have the moon as a comparison.

    Well how about Venus? Venus is a new planet in its current form and is heated from the inside out. We have all the data for this now. The pristine craters, the temperature profiles tens of kilometres into the air. So its not a question of catching energy from the sun and storing it. Venus is superhot and is releasing three times the energy it is receiving. For the greenhouse story to be true Venus would have to be superhot and releasing just the same amount of energy as its receiving.

    The oligarchy made us believe that gravity is space bending, that light is waves devoid of a medium, that all matter was created out of matter a short time ago, and all manner of other nonsense. They can do this because they can apply political pressure. But there is nothing to any of this. Its just abuse of the culture.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    But then again these coal resources are going out in a very inefficient manner. They aren’t creating the local infrastructure you would want. They are part of a system of attaching debt to all things good. To allow all our resources to disappear under a system of orchestrated debt peonage would amount to a Nauru strategy.

    For many years if you went to Catallaxy and asked the economists there: Supposing we sell off our mines and our other strategic assets, sell off all the shares to our allegedly “Australian” remaining mining corporations, and let our corporations load up to the hilt on foreign sourced debt. So everything is owned by foreigners and every entity holds debt? On what basis do we then create wealth?

    You will get thrown off Catallaxy if you ask the economists this sort of thing in a persistent way. We followed the Japanese into land price inflation which was crazy. And we are clearly following Nauru into poverty by relying on resource exploitation rather than manufacturing power. In both cases we are doing things in worse and more irrational ways than the people we should have learned from.

    So I hope you guys manage to slow down the exploitation of the coal until we have a better infrastructure policy in place, a far more focused public service, and a very small and functional financial system that is not allowed to practice fractional reserve money-and-debt creation. Keep at it. You are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. But focus on improving the soil and reducing coal exports. Too many other measures are likely to be very harmful.

  6. The current Federal Environment Minister changed her name from “Susan Ley” to “Sussan Ley” because she believed in numerology and was therefore convinced that adding an ‘s’ to her name would make her life more interesting.

    https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/why-sussan-ley-has-an-extra-s-in-her-name/news-story/4c2bb14f934012a810d2001682e2cc42

    She was appointed to her current position by a Prime Minister who believes in the Biblical Creation story.

    Perhaps some protagonists on this thread will be engaged as consultants by Ms Ley to help her develop a national strategy for environmental remediation using quantum vortex therapy.

  7. Some folks believed there was nothing …. and then it exploded into everything only 13.8 billion years. Others think there was God and he created all things just a few thousand years ago. Others have bought into the big bang racket and think that God created all things from nothing 13.8 billion years ago.

    These are all young-universe creation myths. The universe is too ancient to hope to prove its age. The universe is too complicated to be a mere 13.8 billion years old. Thats the twinkle of an eye.

    But the first of these creation myths is the most stupid, because while growing complexity is plausible, complexity out of nothing is not. So the creationists actually have an edge on current science lies. Nothing could be more faith-based than big bang belief.

  8. IPCC or BP or EU data? I believe this is a controvery not a conspitacy.

    GB says: “And you cannot discuss it because you need to have honest data. Whereas there is an international conspiracy to rig the data.”

    “There is controversy regarding how wind and solar should be counted in equivalence to fossil fuels. BP data treats the output of wind and solar as if they replace somewhat less than the price of wholesale electricity (worth about 3 to 5 cents per kWh). The International Energy Agency treats wind and solar as if they only replace the fuel that operates power plants (worth about 2 to 3 cents per kWh).* In practice, the IEA gives less than half as much credit for wind and solar as does BP. In exceptionally sunny places, solar auction prices can be low enough to match its value to grids.

    “It would make sense to treat wind and solar as replacing electricity, if the systems were set up to include substantial storage capacity. Without at least several days of storage capacity (the situation today), the BP method of counting wind and solar overstates the benefit of wind and solar. Thus, the value of Other Renewables to the EU tends to be overstated by the BP methodology used in Figure 11.”
    https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/04/30/the-climate-change-story-is-half-true/

    And no. I am not endorsing above just pointing out that yes, data needs definition agreement and standardisation so we dont go around throwing up consiracy theories.

  9. Data. THIS Wednesday sea level risen by 0.028mm. ( any fact checkers out there? ) 4m olympic swimming pools.

    “More than 10 billion tonnes of ice was lost to the oceans by surface melting on Wednesday alone”!

    Trump had better resubmit his sea wall development application. ““It’s diabolical,” said former South Carolina Republican Rep. Bob Inglis”.

    “More than 10 billion tonnes of ice was lost to the oceans by surface melting on Wednesday alone, creating a net mass ice loss of about 197 billion tonnes from Greenland in July, she said.

    “It looks like the peak will be today. But the long-term forecast is for continuing warm and sunny weather in Greenland, so that means the amount of the ice loss will continue,” she said on Thursday.

    “The scope of Wednesday’s ice melt is a number difficult to grasp. To understand just how much ice is being lost, a mere 1 billion tonnes – or 1 gigaton – of ice loss is equivalent to about 400,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools, the Danish Meteorological Institute said. And 100 billion tonnes corresponds to a 0.28mm rise in global sea levels.

    “Mottram said that since June 1 – roughly the start of the ice-loss season – the Greenland ice sheet had lost 240 gigatonnes (240 billion metric tonnes) this year. That compares with 290 gigatonnes lost overall in the 2012 melting season, which usually goes until the end of August.”
    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/greenland-has-massive-ice-melt-after-european-heatwave-20190802-p52d6g.html

    “The zoning application raises further questions about how the billionaire developer would confront a risk he has publicly minimized but that has been identified as a defining challenge of this era by world leaders, global industry and the American military. His public disavowal of climate science at the same time he moves to secure his own holdings against the effects of climate change also illustrates the conflict between his political rhetoric and the realities of running a business with seaside assets in the 21st century”
    A permit application for the wall, filed by Trump International Golf Links Ireland and reviewed by POLITICO, explicitly cites global warming and its consequences — increased erosion due to rising sea levels and extreme weather this century — as a chief justification for building the structure.

    “The zoning application raises further questions about how the billionaire developer would confront a risk he has publicly minimized but that has been identified as a defining challenge of this era by world leaders, global industry and the American military. His public disavowal of climate science at the same time he moves to secure his own holdings against the effects of climate change also illustrates the conflict between his political rhetoric and the realities of running a business with seaside assets in the 21st century.

    “It’s diabolical,” said former South Carolina Republican Rep. Bob Inglis, an advocate of conservative solutions to climate change. “Donald Trump is working to ensure his at-risk properties and his company is trying to figure out how to deal with sea level rise. Meanwhile, he’s saying things to audiences that he must know are not true. … You have a soft place in your heart for people who are honestly ignorant, but people who are deceitful, that’s a different thing.”
    https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-climate-change-golf-course-223436

  10. On a brighter note, Noam Chomsky not mincing words and hope: 

    …”while the most powerful state in world history is vigorously fanning the flames, led by a narcissistic megalomaniac—and consummate political demagogue—who knows exactly what he is doing. Donald Trump appealed to the government of Ireland for a permit to build a wall (he loves walls) to protect his golf course from the anticipated sea level rise.”

    “We have two choices: to abandon hope and help ensure that the worst will happen; or to make use of the opportunities that exist and perhaps contribute to a better world. It is not a very difficult choice. There are, of course, sacrifices; time and energy are finite. But there are also the rewards of participating in struggles for peace and justice and the common good. ”

    https://bostonreview.net/politics/noam-chomsky-scott-casleton-choosing-hope

  11. Greenland is not where its supposed to be. Greenland is close to where the former North Pole was. We go to Greenland for 300 000 years of ice data and not to anywhere near the current North Pole. So I’ll pass on Greenland ice because the very long-term trajectory for Greenland has to be ice loss. It may stall during the next few decades, but the long-term trajectory for Greenland is indeed melting. The ice is not supposed to be there. Of course once all that ice gets there, you have albedo effects so the loss of ice is taking a very long time from Greenland, but all that ice doesn’t belong there in a sense.

    So taking Greenland out of the picture, the rest is a lot of cherry-picking from our oligarchically controlled media.

    “IPCC or BP or EU data? I believe this is a controversy not a conspiracy.”

    No its a conspiracy. Its not any sort of collegial disagreement. Its an organised litany of lies by people who paradoxically want us to be dependent on Oil. So they do their best to create a panic and get poor energy sources funded. Now they aren’t God on the throne, and they cannot stop these poor energy sources slowly getting better over time. I am not here denying that solar and wind (not bloody three-blade) cannot get more cost effective over time. The oligarchy don’t need to take this sort of thing into consideration. They can just kick the can down the road. Make us invest in things that are not going to work for a long time, and send their agents around to kill off things that can work pretty quickly.

    Its all lies. All of it. And not by accident. Its a total conspiracy. Just like 9/11, team Einstein, Aether denial. The whole lot is oligarchy controlled lies. There is one organisation, pretending to be three organisations, that subset out of three larger institutions. Goddard, the climate lies section of NOAA, and that UK Hadlee outfit all work together to lie to us, as the email dump showed us. Otherwise NOAA does great work. NOAA is otherwise a very important and good organisation. Underfunded in my view. Unlike NASA which is fundamentally a fraudulent outfit from tip to stern. But the wider organisations aren’t the thing. These subset organisations are cuckoo babies.

    The three centres never stop rejigging the data to show an upward trend, even as people outside the main cities are experiencing colder conditions. This is somewhat an urban-country disagreement. Because as more concrete goes up in the cities, people are still able to take this rigged data seriously. But upwind from the cities thats not the experience of folks on the ground.

    “There is controversy regarding how wind and solar should be counted in equivalence to fossil fuels. BP data treats the output of wind and solar as if they replace somewhat less than the price of wholesale electricity (worth about 3 to 5 cents per kWh).”

    If and only if; This controversy will go away if we have permanently glutted peaking power. Then and only then will we get the price reductions from energy that cannot be predicted well in advance. So from now on these schemes should be coming out of loans made from budget surpluses. They can be zero interest thats okay. But they should be basically all for peaking power…. at least until peaking power is permanently glutted.

    Part of the blame probably has to be sheeted off to John Howard. I like Howard but the thing is he locked up billions of dollars of our gas into what he called “Energy Diplomacy.” All those exports have got to hurt our peaking power. So it made the renewables addition to the grid more clunky then it had to be. Or at least thats what I would assume ahead of someone looking into things in detail. He had good reasons to do this I suppose, but it was an example of his growing extravagance of his later term. It surely means we are paying something like a monopoly price for peaking power. So its not just renewables that have caused the problems. Its the way that they have dovetailed with the auctioning system and the artificial scarcity of gas peaking power. Once we have all these intermittent methods that go into energy storage, particularly pumping water uphill in preparation for peak time …. then the energy prices should start coming down again.

  12. Tim. Thanks as that was the point.

    GB… “These subset organisations are cuckoo babies.”

    As Dad used to say: stop playing with matches.

    “Conspiracy theories a security threat, FBI warns “https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/conspiracy-theories-a-security-threat-fbi-warns-20190803-p52did.html

  13. I’d like to know how this statement “”so the richer the people, the safer the biodiversity” stands up to scrutiny in Australia. Any links or suggestions anyone? Kenny koala has doubts.

    “Economic growth benefits wildlife but growing human populations do not
    “Do the UN’s sustainable development goals promote or limit conservation?

    …”wanted to understand whether progress towards socio-economic targets might limit the likelihood of meeting conservation ones.

    “To explore these links, researchers cross-referenced data from the Living Planet Index on 298 bird and mammal populations — recorded outside protected reserves — with indicators of social, economic and political progress towards the SDGs [ UN’s Sustainable Developmmemt Goals ] in 33 low- and lower-middle income countries obtained from the World Bank. Their analysis, published today in the journal People and Nature, found consistently positive relationships between economic growth and wildlife abundance — so the richer the people, the safer the biodiversity. Similar relationships were found for more gender-equal societies, lower levels of government corruption and longer human lifespans too.”

    “Lead author Judith Ament, PhD researcher at ZSL and UCL, said: “Our study suggests that at a national level, it is possible to work towards conservation and economic development at the same time and underlines the need for further integration of sustainable development strategies. We think this might be because as standards of living rise, people become less dependent on local natural resources for income and food, and environmental regulation becomes tighter. We are concerned that this could lead to more importing however, the impact of which would fall on wildlife elsewhere. This certainly merits further research.”

    “Researchers also found that denser and faster-growing human populations reduced wildlife numbers and that there is evidence for national-level environmental benefits of urbanisation.”

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190802092427.htm

  14. “We are concerned that this could lead to more importing however, the impact of which would fall on wildlife elsewhere. This certainly merits further research.”

    I wonder which planet Judith and her coauthors live on.
    They worry that “This could lead to more importing”? That is giving their paper a significance that it does not have.
    It is likely the more importing that is responsible for the cleaner environment.

  15. “As Dad used to say: stop playing with matches.” Thats not an argument dopey. You cannot have three outfits putting out rigged figures for decades and it be some sort of gigantic mistake. Besides, you are incapable of explaining things like 9/11 (six buildings gutted and only two planes) without postulating a ruling oligarchy. I had to face up to this in 2008 when I found that I had been a neocon in total ,embarrassing and nauseating error for 7 years, when it became clear who really did 9/11. And I think the rest of you ought to face up to the reality of the ruling elite as well.

  16. I may fall into snark, yet you Graeme Bird are exhibiting all the traits of an insulting troll…

    – “Everything is foggy for you. You don’t know what you are driving at. Its argument dementia. Brain mist. You were never all that bright in the first place.”

    – “so we could all laugh at you.”

    – “Its not rambling. Thats you being a moron. Thats all it is.
    and he’s a complete moron. ”
    – “No you are just being an idiot rog.”

    And thanks GB. I assume you mean dopey as in…
    “something cute, or adorable. like snow white and the seven dwarfs, one of the dwarfs were named Dopey, and he was the cute one”
    “Aw, that puppy is so dopey!”
    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dopey

    “Commenters with a repeated history of provocation (trolls) will be banned. ”
    https://johnquiggin.com/discussion-policy/

    Make dialigue not derision.

  17. ANDREW GLIKSON.

    $trillion space games and false prophecies

    “Whereas scientific exploration of space is an exciting project, messianic ideas of colonization of planets raise critical questions, including:”…

    …”Ultimately the $trillion resources come out from the mouths of hungry children, who can hardly gain from space rocket games.

    Prophecies of space colonization divert attention from the extreme urgency of resisting the calamity of global warming and its disastrous consequences and mass extinction of species.

    Prophecies of space colonization give people a mistaken impression as if alternatives exist to environmental repair of the terrestrial atmosphere, oceans and biosphere.

    Space prophets include mainly physicists, but very few biologists, and do not understand that the human body and psychology are inexorably connected with the Earth.

    We are Earthlings, our bodies evolved on Earth and are attuned to the gravity, atmosphere and radiation environment on the surface of this planet as well as the multitude of micro-organisms on whom we depend.

    Exploration of the planets best belongs to mobile robotic micro-laboratories designed to monitor the wave spectrum..

    According to Oxfam eight billionaires now own as much wealth as half the human race.In an ethics-free age false prophecies of planetary colonization—of the rich, by the rich, for the rich— can only be described as a diversion from the need to save life on Earth. The parallels between religious beliefs of heaven and hell are evident, the virtuous (i.e. the super-rich) will be salvaged, whereas the other (poor and/or colored skin) will burn in hell, as Earth is warming.

    One cannot argue with insanity.”
    https://countercurrents.org/2019/07/space-lunacy

    Or see the trillion $’s as a great investment…

    Space market and futures are already sliced diced and numerically evaluated.

    See interactive graph down page of…
    The Global Space Economy ($t)
    https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/investing-in-space

  18. Try Science KT-2. It works for me. On another matter have we really thought through our city layouts? On the news in Sydney this week we had a survey on travelling times in Sydney. 71 minutes a day was the average commute for civilians who work in one place. But tradesmen were stuck in their gas guzzling van/truck for (from memory) 2 hours and 40 minutes per day or something close to it. Now this is a disaster as far as productivity is concerned.

    You have people who make things and people who build things, and then there are many people who seldom do anything very useful for us over the longest run. In the second category its usually tradesmen. The skill set for building things is primarily in the minds of our tradesmen. So here they are wasting time every day in traffic. Now supposing they want to employ an offsider to teach and ride in the truck as well? How is a tradesman going to afford a young offsider to teach and help him, if he’s running into overtime most days, simply because everyone is stuck in the vehicle?

    What would a city look like that cut down on these travel times? Maybe it would take up one tenth the ground area, have one million people and not four million people, with as many of the roads underground as you could possibly manage and first class public transport. Plus the roads financed by congestion taxes but only at peak times. Free travel the rest of the time so that we can manufacture goods and build things more cheaply than the people in other cities.

    I don’t know if the answer looks like this, but it bears thinking about because this time spent in the vehicle by tradesman is a major break on economic performance. I want to close down maybe twenty or thirty government departments to make finance available for a communist department of tunnelling. The M4 opened days ago and its amazing how much time this humble tunnel can save people if they are criss-crossing the city.

    We really need a communist department of tunnelling and a communist department for the development of canals. Some of these outfits need a 5000 year time horizon if we want to produce glorious outcomes.

    Chairman Mao said: “Dig tunnels deep, store grain everywhere, and never seek hegemony.” This needs an update but its pretty good advice right there I would have thought.

  19. “The emphasis in the condition is on the destination of exports and really doesn’t require anything meaningful. The condition is a poor response to the obligation of the panel to consider emissions (in other countries using Australian coal) and the public interest, including intergenerational equality.”

    This point about intergenerational equality is surely a winner. And what about strategic matters? What about the role of Joseph in Genesis? A tonne of coal we export is a tonne of coal we don’t have for later. Or its coal we cannot burn at home. “Winter Is Coming” as they say on the television series. And it surely is in the 2030’s. Why the dilly-dallying around with these arbitrary requirements? If we want less coal burnt we should export less coal. And if we want to export less coal we just increase the royalties on each tonne exported.

    We need to get ready for the cold and dry climate crisis of the 2030’s. Adapt to less coal exports. Get all budgets, federal state and local, into surplus. Ban our banks borrowing from foreign banks or if not establish a low monopsony interest rate for them. Let the AUD be super-cheap.

    If we are running a really tight act now, we can loosen things a bit to help ourselves and others, when the situation has become difficult to cope with.

  20. Is this blog now an outpost of Stormfront? The anti-racist Desipis (check his commenting history) has been banned while the Jew-hating Graeme Bird (Visigoithkhan) is now the most prolific poster.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s