Alexander Carpenter
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Well,AFKTT, “getting lost in the weeds” is what happens when the fundamental premises of your fetish/ideology have been falsified yet you continue to trot out barely-connected factoids in a fog of distraction and irrelevancy. Being addicted to panic-porn helps, too, as does being incapable of comfortably intuiting experiences with the perspective of a complexity-aware paradigm, however tentative that might be.
They are “zombie factoids” in that their potentially-lateral-thinking hypothesis/organism is dead but they remain “real” in a linear-thinking fortress/prison of reductionist neurosis-belief, like a tapeworm in a corpse.And it looks like AFKTT just can’t help himself from getting lost in the weeds. “Factoids” are different from “facts,” as they exist in a falsified universe — but still exist. They are zombies and just don’t mean what the cultists need them to mean to placate their neuroses. Wrong premises => foolish lies. But they get a tiny dispensation insofar as it’s honest idiocy if they first fool themselves and only then work on the ignorant linear-thinking authority-addled sheep. But mostly it’s just corrupted manipulation and righteousness as they serve the agendas of some hiding evil biosphere-destroying Masters. The green new deal (or green whatever) has done more to degrade the biosphere than the “scourge” it is attacking. Lie after lie…
Qui bono? That’s as difficult to answer than the related question, “Who is the King of the world?” Until we answer that question there is nothing effective we can do to end this assault (and others). As Dr. D asked, “Who sent the Memo?”
Only then can the pitchforks do their job.On the little puzzle, in each of the successive cell-triangles cascading down diagonally to the lower right, the lower cell is what’s left when you subtract the left cell from the right cell. This continues all the way to the bottom, passing 15 on the way.
Like I said, “flow.”
Three reminders of reality for those ignorant of maths and science (or ideologically corrupted or just plain stupid):
1. Absolutely nothing in the entire universe is aware of, or sensitive to, or responds in any way to the average value of anything, or even the average value of everything. Also see (remove the “space” after the “https:”):
https: //wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/14/the-laws-of-averages-part-1-fruit-saladhttps: //wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/19/the-laws-of-averages-part-2-a-beam-of-darkness
and, finally: https: //wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/24/the-laws-of-averages-part-3-the-average-average >
2. Although temperature and CO2 are completely uncorrelated, CO2 is directly linked to the integral of temperature, the cumulative heat impulse. The hotter the oceans, the faster CO2 is driven out of solution and into the atmosphere. More than 98% of the world’s free CO2 in the ocean-atmosphere system is already dissolved in the oceans, and is in dynamic equilibrium with the CO2 in the atmosphere. The average lifetime of C14-free fossil fuel CO2 in the atmosphere is only 4 to 5 years and the half-life of CO2 emissions is only 3.5 years.
“The fact is the sun rules the sea temperature, and the sea temperature rules the climate.” — Piers Corbin, astrophysicist
Further, as CO2-saturated and carbonate-buffered ocean water is heated from whatever temperature it had been at, it gives off CO2 (which is why the atmospheric CO2 goes up after the oceans get warmer) and that release further alkalinizes the waters: HCO3- + heat = CO2 gas + OH- so we have yet another equilibrating “feedback.”
More from Piers Corbyn: https: //electroverse.net/british-astrophysicists-mini-ice-age-is-accelerating-new-maunder-minimum-has-begun
3. Here is a sampling of the measurement- or calculation-error-bars actually presented with the data, instead of just the bare data itself presented as though it presented some definite physical accuracy (also note the honest temperature-change axis):
Blinded and stupefied by Carbon Cult ideology, AFKTT fully merits jb-hb’s overly-tolerant correction. Here’s a summary:
Types of change:
Relative change: If something goes from 1% to 2%, it went up 100%
Absolute change: If something goes from 1% to 2%, it went up 1%
Chump change: conflating relative and absolute change“Chump” is perhaps too kind a description for someone who internalizes the climate-change panic-porn and its consequent follies and corruptions.
Stepping outside all the madcap false-dichotomies so many of us seem trapped in these days, here is an almost entirely different approach which resonates with some of the sentiments expressed here by the TAE commentariat:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr-xcuZQk3c.Oxford Talks, UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
During the summer of 2022, the Economist published an article, “ESG, Three letters that won’t save the planet”, as a 9-page feature. The article sets out the argument that we are in a climate crisis, and we should only focus on the E ‘Environment’; therefore, ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: Emissions.Since this article, it seems as if national leaders, captains of industry, standard setters, regulators, and sadly even Chief Sustainability Officers are rapidly going in this direction and hence why Manjula felt compelled to film this Oxford Talk urgently. Firstly, Manjula challenges this theory and illustrates why this strategy is not only wrong but dangerous for humanity, and at the same time, demonstrates that there truly is a more sustainable and simple way forward. Discover in this film three letters that will actually save the planet, the holistic lens with which we need to view sustainability challenges and the changes in our thinking that will truly make a difference for the planet and its people.
These folks can be easily forgiven their wokish resonances (they have a fine balancing act emotionally) and its carbon-cult infiltrations (they aren’t scientists, after all). But they look deep into the hidden powers of human algorithmic behaviors and have the courage to explore their dissonances with the cognitive pretensions that comprise almost the entirety of our public discourse.
Here’s a sweet rant from Karl Denninger, with the implied subtext of fellow-travelers aiding and abetting the core political agenda. Not naming names, but we see some here…
Time To Make It Clear From All Humanity
COP28, or whatever the fraud-laced nonsense from Kerry and his pals might be (and by the way, Kerry is clear in that his agenda is to kill you and/or prohibit reproduction, and no, he’s not kidding) — include many paths forward, including attacking the food supply as he believes cow farts are one of the reasons we’re all going to bake to death.
Methane is the same thing as natural gas, chemically CH4. It is also formed in the gut of an animal when it consumes carbohydrates — that is, said animal farts due to incomplete conversion. This is biological reality; you fart, I fart, the cow in the field farts (a lot.)
Kerry, of course, refuses to cut his own carbon emissions down to size. He could live in a place that has the required things for himself and his wife, an heiress. They are very wealthy but nothing requires him and his wife to “live large” — they do because they want to and can afford it, not because they need to. Snopes and others try to dismiss this claiming that his wife actually owns many of these things but that is immaterial; they are a husband and wife couple and thus their actions while married, which they are at the present time, are properly charged to both of them equally. If he disagreed he could divorce her and live as a single man in a tiny, 500 square foot house. He doesn’t; he instead produces a hundred or even a thousand times as much in carbon emissions into the environment as a common person.
Five very large and expensive mansions, a private jet, yachts and similar are all extreme energy consumers. Exactly zero of them are necessary for the human condition; all are a matter of convenience. Kerry could fly commercial, of course — but that’s “beneath” him, you see, so on a carbon-per-mile basis he emits a hundred times what you do going to the same place and in the daily process of living his life.
The problem with this is that carbon is the reason all these things exist. Without them his mansions would not exist, his yacht would not exist, his private plane would not exist and neither would all that other fancy stuff he and his wife enjoy. In fact, his wife, a wealthy heiress, would not have any of her money (now his too) without the exploitation of carbon — and he has given up exactly zero of that which, according to him, you should not have the right to gain through your exploitation of carbon.
The facts are that carbon is at the core of human progress. I don’t care if you like that or not. Without it literally nothing you enjoy today exists. The expansion of human life expectancy has basically all, since the beginning of the human race, been about the exploitation of carbon in various forms.
Indeed it was the exploitation of carbon to cook animals, and our consumption of meat, that led to the expansion of the (protein-based) human brain and thus our capacity for humanity that exists today. The human race would literally not exist but for the exploitation of carbon.
These people argue that we must stop this and that the planet will be irretrievably damaged if we don’t.
They’re wrong, and they know it.
They seek to keep you under their boot, and that is all. If they really believed any of their bullshit they would have voluntarily ceased all of their own ridiculously outsized exploitation of carbon. Kerry and his wife would have destroyed their mansions, irrevocably branding the deeds to said property as “clear, open, green space” which of course would be a carbon sink, since plants turn CO2 into biomass and in the process release oxygen into the atmosphere. They have not. They would live in a house sufficient to shelter two humans, built entirely sustainably with very thick insulated walls and entirely powered by the “green energy” they claim to support, all sourced from materials and manufacturing using same with no inputs from slave labor or other exploitation of the earth such as open mining for lithium and enslaving children for cobalt. They would own zero private aircraft and no boat of any sort, say much less a yacht. They would share one electric vehicle, charged entirely with wind or solar energy — and if it wasn’t available because it was calm, cloudy, rainy or snowing, they’d do without. For any trip under about 5 miles which didn’t involve carrying more than 20 or so pounds of load beyond their person they’d use a bicycle, the most-efficient man-powered means of conveyance ever invented (still, after all these years), benefiting from aerobic exercise at the same time.
They haven’t done any of this but they wish to impose on you such a lifestyle at literal gunpoint.
We, the humans of this planet, must make this clear: No, they won’t impose any such thing. We are not slaves and we will not accept the premise that is blatantly unconstitutional — and thus illegal on its face — that they are “more equal” and thus can do whatever they want carbon-wise, enjoying the fruits thereof, while we cannot.
Fuck these people and their “goals”; their goal is your slavery, not the planet’s health and it is irrevocably proved by people like Kerry, Gore and many others who demonstrate every single day that they believe exactly zero of what they preach.
Some of the major davidveale errors (are you sure you want this?):
Strategic confirmation bias, gathering factoids and cramming them into a fixed prior fright-wig belief-structure without looking at the overall situation with an open mind.
Tactical failure to distinguish between absolute change and relative change. Going from 1 ppm to 2 ppm is a 100% relative change, while it is just a 0.0001% absolute change. This one is really dumb, or really corrupt, as it generates bigger, more fear-mongerable numbers.
Not using his own brains, and the usual self-righteous despairing sanctimony.
Failure to identify the real “causes” of biosphere degradation: industrial toxicity and mechanical disruption. And then, there’s the old standby, too damn many people just being their oblivious algorithmic selves.
Failure to recognize the poly-cyclic nature of natural changes in climate, and the cumulative success of the biosphere and the organisms within it at adapting to changes far greater than what we are seeing now.
And so forth, ad nauseam…
OK, so we have this neologism “polycrisis,” which is properly complexity-aware. Let’s not get too jargoned-up on ourselves, as we have a well-established word that has even better resonances already: “predicament.”
Yes, a twitchy mouse-click bounce, compounded by no immediate acknowledgement of submission with a caution to wait for it to show up.
Sorry…You moderators (robot or human) can delete this little note…
Just note that davidveale’s continued errors (to be charitable) are mostly because he fails (probably lacking sufficient depth of understanding of science) to distinguish between correlation and causality.
When I am feeling kind, I call what he does “correlation grandiosity,” which inflates a trivial linear-cause-and-effect factoid into a general complex-system-wide Truth — and also fails to distinguish reductionist in vitro situations from complex in vivo situations (a variation on that same theme).
When I’m not, I simply recognize moronic complacency corrupted by tribal pressures and compounded by intellectual and moral cowardice, all masquerading as humble “reasonableness” hiding behind covert (and hypocritical) ideological rigidity and an inability to actually experience from the ground of their own integrity.
There are so many like doofuses like this, it has become almost effortless to recognize them. Maybe it’s time they got honest (or tried a different style of systematic lying, which may include self-deception). They might even attempt to learn what really drives that dread “climate change,” but that is probably asking too much (although many others are actively engaged in that endeavor, with increasing success).
It may be productive to try to find one that is halfway sane, and ask if they can identify how and why they have sold out — and provide them 12-Step-like moral support as they grapple with their demons.davidveale at #149181:
Thus, any temperature increase — regardless of the trigger — will move additional CO2 to the atmosphere, creating the precise “lag” effect which you’re implying proves that CO2 cannot be a cause of warming.
Is there a flaw in my reasoning? I’d like to correct it if you know of one.
There is no “reasoning, and no “thus:” you have listed two trivial factoids which, however truthy, are the least among a hundred other variables and forces and energies and negative feedbacks and secondary feedbacks and inpulses and emergences from the complex coupled open non-linear system that comprises all that accumulates to what we are calling “climate.” Remember, The Tao maintains the center.
That’s not reasonable; it is a fact. Your “thinking has to encompass more than you can even imagine from within your reductionist linearizing covert climate-cult pseudo-humble fake “question.”Nazilenskii with the arms manufacturers: I have not seen so many shit-eating grins in one place in a very long time.
Ian Graham, the right way to “tackle” climate change is to relax and enjoy its benefits.
The whole “anthropogenic” bit is pure anthropo-deception, and you have fallen for it.
And all those billions and trillions of dread tons of CO2? A drop in the bucket.
Learn some real science and look around you (and maybe even back into the past), and pay attention to important matters, such as the price of eggs in China, or even (and here I tread in tricky waters) the strange fact that the Palestinians are more Semitic than the Israelis…
And then have a quiet chuckle at all the fatuous noise you have internalized, perhaps even cleansing your mind with a serene psychedelic experience (also good for purging your internally-generated PTSD).I am definitely looking forward with some jaded confirmation-bias to see and hear the tales that will appear on the various media from the captives, hostages, and prisoners that will be released during this break (and probably after, too).
How were they treated? Do they feel they deserve their fates? Who do they think are the “bad guys” now? What has happened to their identity-myths and tribal affiliations? Were they intimidated and sworn to adhere to some particular narrative? Were they surprised at the dramas?
What suppressions, evasions, and squirming will we infer from the propagandists and their masters? Will there be public “testimonial wars” in the media and secretly in the bureaus? What a great opportunity for another vast vortex of lies, counter-lies, and posturings (with occasional embedded high-integrity truth-telling, truths both large and small)… Stay tuned…Our host, at Comment 147154:
I got tired of the climate “science”, because it feels far too much like the Covid “science”. Clickbait for the deniers, or clickbait for the alarmists, it’s still just clickbait. What are “better sources” depends on opinion.
We need to restart this issue all the way back to the start. Without pretending we “know” anything,
For several years now, I have accumulated an omnibus analysis of, and links to, state-of-the-art “climate science” in a Word document entitled Do You “Believe” in Climate Change?, downloadable from:
The state of that art is changing all the time as real “climate scientists” learn more about how climate-change really works, and why, so this is a moving target. Nonetheless, for a complete understanding of all the complexities, I know of no better source.
Once again, I offer this compendium for our delectation (and annoyance). Enjoy…
“[Prof. Eliot Jacobson] made a new graph of global 2-meter surface temperatures that includes data back to 1940.
“Just stunning. We now live on a planet that human civilization has never experienced before.”
Well, it looks like Ian Graham is replacing AFKTT as our pet climate-idiocy troll.
Of course, there was no climate before 1940. There: how’s that for climate-denial?Highly recommended:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMVe4nxvQ6U
Chuck Watson: “War, Rumours of War, and Governance” | The Great Simplification #94. with Nate Hagens, Oct 20, 2023
On this Special episode Nate speaks once again with risk expert Chuck Watson for a critical assessment of the unfolding situation around Israel which adds to the rapidly escalating dangers of our current geopolitical landscape. As tensions rise, the potential risks that geopolitical confrontation in the Middle East poses could spill over into energy, economic systems, and our social fabric – Chuck lends his deep expertise and decades of experience to shed light on these complex dynamics. How do our individual perspectives of where history begins influence who we see as “good” or “evil” and is it even possible to find an unbiased source of ‘truth’? What does Western diplomacy look like in a world no longer based on fear – and will the United States risk being stretched too thin trying to preserve the unipolar world of past generations? How do we even begin to navigate the minefield of geopolitical tensions that seem to be growing daily so as to maintain some sort of stability that avoids catastrophic outcomes in coming years?
Also, parenthetically, it’s a genuine pleasure to hear a realistic conversation without any climate-whining…
This website is cursed these days with some combination of buggy software, hacking, censorship, harassment, snooping, inertia, complexity, involuting reflexiveness, … whatever. One way to clean it up would be to reboot it from scratch on a different platform with different technical personnel. It occurs to me that something analogous could be done in DC, and so-many other places as well.
A visual: All of us here are on a cruise-ship just coming into port, pulling up at a pier, walking down the gangplank and across the pier, then up another gangplank onto a different ship that sails forthwith on our voyage. Fraught…5G WWIII is already happening. It’s that “5G”part that fools most people, who are looking into the past for their definitions and frames of reference.
https://www.mauldineconomics.com-download-global-macro-update-transcript-dr.-pippa-malmgren.weblocFor some of us, this may seem a parable for our times:
https://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2023/08/margherita-sarfatti-woman-who-destroyed.html
For others of us, it may seem a different parable for our times…
DBS at #140057: It is no coincidence that truth-telling is the principal recommendation (insistence?) of Jordan B. Peterson, as the foundation of all integrity, individual and collective. Vox clamantis in deserto.
Human Behavioral Algorithms in perpetual draft mode, as new resonances and nuances come to awareness…
Possibly as complex a system as we will ever encounter with any intimacy, and it’s us…
And here’s a paleoclimate tidbit for AFKTT and his ilk:
A Brief History of Climate, From Prehistory to The Imaginary Crisis of the 21st Century
Another beyond-coherent context-embracing overview (with comments) of the Ukraine (and overall geopolitical) situation:
https://www.ecosophia.net/notes-on-stormtrooper-syndrome/
One must wonder how we ‘highly-evolved” humans manage to remain trapped in the deja vu looping that becomes painfully obvious only in retrospect. It is, I propose, because our fundamental mythology about ourselves is incorrect, in that it overvalues our cognitive powers and totally disregards (and even denies, when given the opportunity) the biological (gene-based-with-cultural-elaborations) algorithmic almost-imperatives that define our individual and collective behaviors.
When I get to my computer later today, I’ll post the Dropbox link to a doc that explores in depth this matter recognized by a few (including Greer, above)…
The failure to step outside our cognitive-mythology is a classic example of how when your premises are wrong, you will ask the wrong questions, get the wrong answers, reach the wrong conclusions (and believe in them, especially if the premises are belief-based).For those of us who seek to understand the actual, legitimate science that is developing about the Earth’s climate, here is the current iteration of a weekly collection of research reports and commentary:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/31/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-561/
Both Watts Up With That (WUWT) and Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) are news aggregators that represent the honest scientific-method approach to understanding climate dynamics as a science, as well as examine its denial, corruption, and politicization, and are an excellent antidote to the hype and hysteria we get from the Standard Narrative and its dupes (or co-conspirators) such as AFKTT.
Aspnaz…
The Chinese government does not like being ripped off and will not pay high medical prices if it considers there to be an alternative. The nice part of this story was that the medical industry received a kick to the shins. Of course, those people who were trying to milk the Chinese system will have returned to the USA and Europe and be spreading bad vibes about China.
Don’t trust them – always a good policy – but they are not just like the USA where corporations rule.
…and neither are the Russians. So many “primitive” folks are just like we were a hundred or so years ago, before we got “hegemonized” and “financialized.” Do we whiff a civilizational trajectory pattern here? And, yes, “Turnings…” And what was that about rhyming? And nothing to actually do about it, but tend our gardens.
My plants’ leaves have nine lobes, here at 9 degrees north latitude.
Phoenixvoice, and others…
The responsible-adult approach is to “Trust but verify.” Paranoia and helplessness are averted as any dissonances are revealed, to guide further relationship and engagement (if any).
I posted a longish message just now, and reloaded, to find this note atop the comments:
This topic has 29 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 2 seconds ago by Alexander Carpenter
Except that the message text that I submitted wasn’t there at the bottom of the comments column (or anywhere else, for that matter).
And I lost the text of that message because copying the note overwrote the text of my message in the copy buffer. Now that’s three messages lost. It seems that we must go to awkward and elaborate lengths to double-assure that we don’t lose our writings and engagements here.
Admins: I’m trusting that you are getting it together and eliminating the mis-directions such as the anti-spam distraction (Pretending to not be censorship? Part of some sort of covert suppression of the site overall? What…?)
And let’s see if this comment elicits the anti-spam fake-robot…
And what happened to my last message that has disappeared in the existential struggle against spam?
Please advise…
If AFKTT’s “science” were as well-developed as his invective, abuse, badgering, and shaming skills, he would just shut up as having no basis for his fear-mongering. Mean and nasty, with no space for learning new insights and admitting error, and committed to (imprisoned in?) his premises and rhetoric, AFKTT just tries to beat up those who are more astute than he and his “owners” about the realities of our changing climate. What an asshole.
Dr. D, Raul, and others have it right, AFKTT and his “sources” have it wrong, but in service to some agenda they cannot (or at least do not) acknowledge. What is it? ‘Fess up…
Perhaps he is projecting when he proposes that the climate common-sense of the commenters here who do know the actual science is undermining the credibility of the rest of the content and analysis here at TAE. Maybe that is part of his own conscious intention.
Otherwise why so much vitriol about “fake narratives” and our failure to suck up to his own.
Shame on him for making an absolutist obsession about some crackpot “doom” into such a rant supported only by “factoids” out of context and/or simply wrong.
Since authentic climate science (as imperfect as it is) is readily available were he to look, the only credible explanation for his rants and bullying is that he has an ulterior motive and is serving some covert agenda with evil intent. Why? Qui bono?
