Why Glenn Stevens is breathing easier since Tony Abbott got rolled | afr.com
It's not as if this piece is written with much objectivity, but it does make it clear that Abbott was a bit more of an ideologically motivated twit as PM than may have been obvious (given that he would waiver and not implement things he really wanted to do, apparently.)
Monday, October 12, 2015
More magic water needed
Facing the rain deadline, in a world over which we have diminishing control
I see that Paul Sheehan manages to write about El Nino and the potential for lack of rainfall in Australia to wipe a lot of money from the value of crops, all without mentioning climate change.
I guess someone who was impressed with Ian Plimer's wildly inaccurate Heaven and Earth may not know that climate scientists have been worried about climate change causing more intense "super El Nino" events.
I see that Paul Sheehan manages to write about El Nino and the potential for lack of rainfall in Australia to wipe a lot of money from the value of crops, all without mentioning climate change.
I guess someone who was impressed with Ian Plimer's wildly inaccurate Heaven and Earth may not know that climate scientists have been worried about climate change causing more intense "super El Nino" events.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Into the detail of the "many worlds"
Anyone who reads about quantum physics would know that the rather improbable sounding "many worlds" interpretation of it has actually become quite popular amongst physicists.
But there's a review paper on arXiv from earlier this year that has a good explanation of the uncertainty and debate as to what the interpretation really means in terms of the "multiplicity" of universes. Starting from Everett down, it's not actually obvious how it's meant to work.
I don't think I had really appreciated the extent of the problem with the idea before. The paper is not always easy to follow in every detail, but it is generally understandable and is well worth reading. Here's the abstract:
But there's a review paper on arXiv from earlier this year that has a good explanation of the uncertainty and debate as to what the interpretation really means in terms of the "multiplicity" of universes. Starting from Everett down, it's not actually obvious how it's meant to work.
I don't think I had really appreciated the extent of the problem with the idea before. The paper is not always easy to follow in every detail, but it is generally understandable and is well worth reading. Here's the abstract:
Everett's interpretation of quantum mechanics was proposed to avoid problems inherent in the prevailing interpretational frame. It assumes that quantum mechanics can be applied to any system and that the state vector always evolves unitarily. It then claims that whenever an observable is measured, all possible results of the measurement exist. This notion of multiplicity has been understood in different ways by proponents of Everett's theory. In fact the spectrum of opinions on various ontological questions raised by Everett's approach is rather large, as we attempt to document in this critical review. We conclude that much remains to be done to clarify and specify Everett's approach.
The old trolley problem
The Lifespan of a Thought Experiment: Do We Still Need the Trolley Problem? - The Atlantic
A nice article here looking at the history of the trolley problem in philosophy and ethics, and which notes it is getting a bit of a revival because of the prospect of driverless cars. Cool.
A nice article here looking at the history of the trolley problem in philosophy and ethics, and which notes it is getting a bit of a revival because of the prospect of driverless cars. Cool.
Friday, October 09, 2015
Testing the medium
How Harry Houdini and Scientific American Fought the Fake Mediums of the 1920s
It's an extract from a book on the topic. Sounds like a good read.
It's an extract from a book on the topic. Sounds like a good read.
Can't last
These leaked records cast light on how ISIS makes its money - Vox
Interesting to note the long term frailty of the ISIS current financial "model".
What I want to know is - who's buying their oil, anyway?
Interesting to note the long term frailty of the ISIS current financial "model".
What I want to know is - who's buying their oil, anyway?
How fathers pass on problems
Discovery of how environmental memories may be transmitted from a father to his grandchildren
It seems it's all in how certain proteins affect the DNA, not just the DNA itself.
It seems it's all in how certain proteins affect the DNA, not just the DNA itself.
Whiteford on tax and transfer
Who really benefits from Australia's tax and social security system?
I've always thought Peter Whiteford sounded very reasonable. (I recall he has made occasional appearances over the years at Catallaxy in threads to challenge arguments put up by Sinclair Davidson. He has seemingly given up on doing that, given the rabid threads as well as the evidence-resistant propaganda-ish nature of many of the posts.)
The approach taken in this report is good and a necessary corrective to the over-simplified complaint of the "small government, less tax" lobby:
I've always thought Peter Whiteford sounded very reasonable. (I recall he has made occasional appearances over the years at Catallaxy in threads to challenge arguments put up by Sinclair Davidson. He has seemingly given up on doing that, given the rabid threads as well as the evidence-resistant propaganda-ish nature of many of the posts.)
The approach taken in this report is good and a necessary corrective to the over-simplified complaint of the "small government, less tax" lobby:
A final issue that arises from this analysis relates to the question of whether people can be characterised as “lifters” or “leaners”and relates to the idea that it is only the rich that effectively pay (net) taxes. A lifecycle perspective shows that people whose lifetime annualised income is less than $25,000 actually pay more than 10% of their lifetime income in taxes (rather than near to zero), and this doesn’t include indirect taxes.
In contrast, middle income people over their lifetime receive far more in social security benefits than do people in these income brackets at a point in time. The implication is that a much wider range of people benefit from the welfare state and pay taxes to support it than is often acknowledged.
The war and wanton women
Sexually Active Women Were Quarantined During World War II - The Atlantic
Well, no, I hadn't heard about this before. This bit in particular:
Well, no, I hadn't heard about this before. This bit in particular:
At first, health officials focused on sex workers who had been arrested
near military bases or factories. As the war progressed, however, the
focus widened from sex workers to “any women who were somehow viewed or
under suspicion as being delinquent,” Parascandola said. Some places
dispatched health workers to bars and dance halls to scout out women who
appeared too sexually forward; in other cases, officials would wait at
bus stops, questioning the women who came off the bus about their
reasons for traveling to the town.
Women who didn’t agree to submit to testing could still be quarantinedCan't remember this aspect of the war being featured in a movie before...
via court order if officials suspected her of having an STD—a caveat
that was interpreted liberally. “For example, they might arrest a woman
who they found hanging around the camps under vagrancy charges,” he
said, “and they might use some claim of suspicion for venereal disease
because this women was hanging around with all these men.”
The Cruz response
It was a bit slow coming, probably because people did not really like to been seen to be dissing the poorly performing Sierra Club guy who clearly wasn't expecting it, but here is Phil Plait's rebuttal (follow his many links) to the King of Fools Ted Cruz.
Cruz's performance has been greeted with acclaim by Right wing sites everywhere, from Andrew Bolt to Powerline.
As I have said recently, I think its time for gloves off as far as politicians, journalists (and scientists) who are properly informed on the matter of climate change - start calling out Cruz and his ilk as fools who are refusing to inform themselves on science. By all means, they can still be pointed to the information to rebut their arguments, but call them fools for not reading or believing it.
It's really the arrogance mixed with ignorance that is getting to me - they genuinely believe that climate science, which has been becoming more certain and understood over the last couple of decades, is teetering on the edge of collapse, all because a mere handful of largely discredited scientists (4 or 5, tops) in the field lend support to the non-scientist advocates, politicians and conspiracy theorists such as Monckton, Watts, Steyn, Delingpole, Bolt, etc. Guys, you're being fooled. Your arrogance is entirely misplaced. If you read more broadly, you might understand.
Now having said that: I will still make the observation that the last refuge of the denialists is the satellite temperature record, specifically honing in on the RSS one lately. I am sure denialists do not know what the satellites are measuring, the history of the problems with this method and sometimes dramatic adjustments (see links I have previously provided), or that that one of the senior members of the RSS team wrote late last year:
Such a spike is not yet appearing in the satellite figures. If it does, and is of a similar magnitude to the the 1998 one, then the denialists will likely have a serious problem as to how they maintain their lines.
If it doesn't appear, then the matter of the method of how the satellite temperature is measured and the records compiled, and the issue of its comparison with radiosonde readings, will be in for some more consideration.
It would simpler for everyone if there is a spike.
But - whether there is or isn't a spike will not matter much to those enduring a temperature rise, and rainfall changes, on the surface. That's where we live - not in the middle of the troposphere.
Cruz's performance has been greeted with acclaim by Right wing sites everywhere, from Andrew Bolt to Powerline.
As I have said recently, I think its time for gloves off as far as politicians, journalists (and scientists) who are properly informed on the matter of climate change - start calling out Cruz and his ilk as fools who are refusing to inform themselves on science. By all means, they can still be pointed to the information to rebut their arguments, but call them fools for not reading or believing it.
It's really the arrogance mixed with ignorance that is getting to me - they genuinely believe that climate science, which has been becoming more certain and understood over the last couple of decades, is teetering on the edge of collapse, all because a mere handful of largely discredited scientists (4 or 5, tops) in the field lend support to the non-scientist advocates, politicians and conspiracy theorists such as Monckton, Watts, Steyn, Delingpole, Bolt, etc. Guys, you're being fooled. Your arrogance is entirely misplaced. If you read more broadly, you might understand.
Now having said that: I will still make the observation that the last refuge of the denialists is the satellite temperature record, specifically honing in on the RSS one lately. I am sure denialists do not know what the satellites are measuring, the history of the problems with this method and sometimes dramatic adjustments (see links I have previously provided), or that that one of the senior members of the RSS team wrote late last year:
A similar, but stronger case can be made using surface temperature datasets, which I consider to be more reliable than satellite datasets (they certainly agree with each other better than the various satellite datasets do!).However, the oft repeated line has been that the satellite method may be more sensitive to ENSO and the 1998 El Nino than the surface temperature record, in which case one would expect that the current El Nino may see a similar spike to that in 1998.
Such a spike is not yet appearing in the satellite figures. If it does, and is of a similar magnitude to the the 1998 one, then the denialists will likely have a serious problem as to how they maintain their lines.
If it doesn't appear, then the matter of the method of how the satellite temperature is measured and the records compiled, and the issue of its comparison with radiosonde readings, will be in for some more consideration.
It would simpler for everyone if there is a spike.
But - whether there is or isn't a spike will not matter much to those enduring a temperature rise, and rainfall changes, on the surface. That's where we live - not in the middle of the troposphere.
Thursday, October 08, 2015
All a bit incestuous
Here's Why Samsung's Profits Are Up Nearly 80%
Samsung Electronics says its operating profits for the third quarter will hit $6.29 billion, up 80% year-over-year and smashing Wall Street expectations.
That forecast from the South Korean tech conglomerate exceeded analysts’ expectations of about $5.89 billion. It marks a surprise for a company that as recently as the previous quarter saw operating profits fall 4% from the same period last year.
What’s driving the comeback? It’s all about Samsung’s semiconductors division, the backbone of its third quarter success. And that’s partially thanks to smartphone rival Apple, which uses chips manufactured by Samsung in its latest iPhone 6 lineup (Samsung’s own phones also use Samsung-made chips). Samsung’s chip business saw revenues grow by around 24% to about $28 billion last year.Aren't Samsung and South Korea generally great examples of crony capitalism? (Here's The Economist in 2010 briefly on the topic.) Doesn't their success send some sort of challenge to small government advocates that their approach isn't the only one that can succeed?
When the constitution stuffs it up
Umpqua: Is Jeb Bush right about 'stuff happens'? - CNN.com
Somewhat interesting to read about the way the interaction between State and Federal powers in the US makes creating an effective background check system in the US so difficult.
But never forget - the fundamental resistance to increased effectiveness of any such system is driven by a "they're coming to get our guns!" paranoia encouraged by the NRA and like bodies.
Somewhat interesting to read about the way the interaction between State and Federal powers in the US makes creating an effective background check system in the US so difficult.
But never forget - the fundamental resistance to increased effectiveness of any such system is driven by a "they're coming to get our guns!" paranoia encouraged by the NRA and like bodies.
Lettuce eat
This Robot-Run Indoor Farm Can Grow 10 Million Heads Of Lettuce A Year | Co.Exist | ideas impact
That seems an awful lot of lettuce...
That seems an awful lot of lettuce...
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Rainfall will change - just not sure where
As I noted in a recent post, some climate scientists are warning that the current Californian drought may well be small compared to some ones that may be coming under climate change - lasting up to 35 years, perhaps.
Now it seems to me that for a State with a high population and a very big agricultural sector (which has presently been getting by on diminishing groundwater), a 35 year drought would be a very big problem indeed. How are economists and their models on the effects on GDP dealing with that scenario?
More generally, a paper just out in Nature Climate Change explains that changes to tropical rainfall are shown under all modelling of the future climate under AGW, but the problem is working out where. As the abstract explains:
Now it seems to me that for a State with a high population and a very big agricultural sector (which has presently been getting by on diminishing groundwater), a 35 year drought would be a very big problem indeed. How are economists and their models on the effects on GDP dealing with that scenario?
More generally, a paper just out in Nature Climate Change explains that changes to tropical rainfall are shown under all modelling of the future climate under AGW, but the problem is working out where. As the abstract explains:
Many tropical countries are exceptionally vulnerable to changes in rainfall patterns, with floods or droughts often severely affecting human life and health, food and water supplies, ecosystems and infrastructure1. There is widespread disagreement among climate model projections of how and where rainfall will change over tropical land at the regional scales relevant to impacts2, 3, 4, with different models predicting the position of current tropical wet and dry regions to shift in different ways5, 6. Here we show that despite uncertainty in the location of future rainfall shifts, climate models consistently project that large rainfall changes will occur for a considerable proportion of tropical land over the twenty-first century. The area of semi-arid land affected by large changes under a higher emissions scenario is likely to be greater than during even the most extreme regional wet or dry periods of the twentieth century, such as the Sahel drought of the late 1960s to 1990s. Substantial changes are projected to occur by mid-century—earlier than previously expected2, 7—and to intensify in line with global temperature rise. Therefore, current climate projections contain quantitative, decision-relevant information on future regional rainfall changes, particularly with regard to climate change mitigation policy.Again, I wonder how economic forecasts over the coming decades can take this uncertainty into account.
The unexpected
New The X-Files makes a dazzling debut as Cannes hosts world premiere
Given the show had become boring and not worth watching in the last couple of seasons, I wasn't expecting the re-boot to be good. I hope this review is right, though.
Given the show had become boring and not worth watching in the last couple of seasons, I wasn't expecting the re-boot to be good. I hope this review is right, though.
When funny actors age
Jerry Lewis is 89 and frail, but still making public appearances:
I don't think he has many more left in him, though, by the sounds of the report.
I'm not sure what Chevy Chase does in his spare time now, but he has not physically aged well, at all:
He's an inspiration for dieters, though.
Doris Day, on the other hand, looks pretty much how I think she should (she's 91):
Last time I saw Billy Crystal on TV, I thought that his head was starting to look strange. But in this photo, I think the beard makes him look more normal:
He's 67, and just had a TV series cancelled.
David Letterman, 68, on the other hand, looks positively ancient when he grows a beard:
Kirstie Alley turned up on The Middle this last season (still a funny sitcom, shamefully overlooked by the Australian market) and she is a good looking 64 (as long as she keeps the weight off):
Mind you, she would surely have had the best medical assistance Hollywood could buy.
The best preserved comedian of the modern era, however, has to be Bette White, who at 93 is still working and appears to have stopped aging 30 years ago:
Is there a reason for this post? Not that I can tell. It's strangely pointless...
I don't think he has many more left in him, though, by the sounds of the report.
I'm not sure what Chevy Chase does in his spare time now, but he has not physically aged well, at all:
He's an inspiration for dieters, though.
Doris Day, on the other hand, looks pretty much how I think she should (she's 91):
Last time I saw Billy Crystal on TV, I thought that his head was starting to look strange. But in this photo, I think the beard makes him look more normal:
He's 67, and just had a TV series cancelled.
David Letterman, 68, on the other hand, looks positively ancient when he grows a beard:
Kirstie Alley turned up on The Middle this last season (still a funny sitcom, shamefully overlooked by the Australian market) and she is a good looking 64 (as long as she keeps the weight off):
Mind you, she would surely have had the best medical assistance Hollywood could buy.
The best preserved comedian of the modern era, however, has to be Bette White, who at 93 is still working and appears to have stopped aging 30 years ago:
Is there a reason for this post? Not that I can tell. It's strangely pointless...
Worse to come
10 Weather Extremes In October's First Week | Weather Underground
Given that there is a strong chance the El Nino's full effects are really just getting into gear, there is strong reason to believe we're in for a period of severe weather of different types around the world.
Mind you, I see that some economists have come out arguing that El Nino events are actually pretty good economically - the benefits outweigh the downside, globally. Yet some of the examples given in the article seem to be along the same lines that can be used to argue that earthquakes and war can be "good" for an economy.
Personally, I'd prefer that the economy improve without the death, destruction and pestilence along the way - but I'm not an economist.
Given that there is a strong chance the El Nino's full effects are really just getting into gear, there is strong reason to believe we're in for a period of severe weather of different types around the world.
Mind you, I see that some economists have come out arguing that El Nino events are actually pretty good economically - the benefits outweigh the downside, globally. Yet some of the examples given in the article seem to be along the same lines that can be used to argue that earthquakes and war can be "good" for an economy.
Personally, I'd prefer that the economy improve without the death, destruction and pestilence along the way - but I'm not an economist.
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Good to see good Spielberg reviews
Bridge of Spies Reviews - Metacritic
I had been intending to note here that I was completely underwhelmed by the trailer for Spielberg's Bridge of Spies - it was a terrible, plodding example of trailer salesmanship, if you ask me.
Yet we all know a great trailer can be made from a bad or average movie, so it is always possible that it can work in the other direction, too.
That seems to be the case here, and I am pleased to see that the movie is generally getting solid reviews.
I had been intending to note here that I was completely underwhelmed by the trailer for Spielberg's Bridge of Spies - it was a terrible, plodding example of trailer salesmanship, if you ask me.
Yet we all know a great trailer can be made from a bad or average movie, so it is always possible that it can work in the other direction, too.
That seems to be the case here, and I am pleased to see that the movie is generally getting solid reviews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)