Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I wonder how the myopic thinkers will react to this scenario. Of course, we'll have to wait a decade for them to realize what has already happened.
Or we could realize that attitude won't keep industry in the US.
You could read the IPCC report.
I have. They do not have evidence to back those claims for small changes in temperature.
Overall, it doesn't look good.
I think here the point of the IPCC is to make it not look good.
Yes, how dare the US government insist on there being some standards and paperwork for a flying machine that moves at freeway speed, weighs as much as a child, has spinning blades of doom, a battery that can catch fire if poked wrong and will be built by a company that has trouble taping a box closed.
And does nothing to actual develop these standards.
Only if by "it" you're just talking about the bailout itself and not the crash.
No, I speak of both.One can't consider the crash in absence of the bailout.
Car analogy time: a car crashed. The cops (government) showed up to investigate, the politicians bicker, and somehow they ended up writing more laws (regulations) as a response. That there was a government response doesn't say anything about whether the car crash was caused by free markets or lack of it.
Car analogy time: a car crashes and the driver gets the local government to pay for any damage he does. He then crashes again a few years later and gets the government to do it again. This pattern repeats for the past century or so of this guy's driving record with him getting more and more aggressive with his driving as the years go on.
The self-regulation that resulted in a massive taxpayer-backed bailout?
"Massive taxpayer-backed bailout" implies it wasn't a free market.
Deregulating banks wan supposed to free up capital and introduce more-efficient financial structures that would more properly react to market needs. What happened instead? A massive implosion of wealth that wipes trillions of dollars in assets off the books and resulted in the single biggest transfer of wealth (and that from poor to rich) in US history. And here we are again, fighting any kind of regulation whatsoever, like none of that happened.
Let's note that deregulating banks did do that. That need still exists. We still want capital "freed" up. We still want more-efficient financial structures. And the rich lose more proportionally than the poor do in these bubble bursts IMHO. Capital is just a better return on effort in general than labor is in today's high competition world.
Jeez, you guys make me want to empty this bottle of scotch down my gullet, and then bash my head in with it. The overwhelming stupid is just unbearable.
Go for it.
Now you tell us. What other secrets are you hiding?
This is the point of evidence - to distinguish between hypotheses. When facts don't, then they aren't evidence. The list presented earlier is such an example. There are at least thousands of weather-related events to cherry-pick through each year. So it should come as no surprise that we have lots of rare weather events which can be frivolously blamed on AGW.
world temp has risen 0.7C over past 10 years
we have lost permafrost that has led to the draining of 10,000 lakes worldwide
each year an extra 10,000 sq km of ocean is created from melting arctic ice sheet
in Sept 2005 an area of the arctic ice sheet the size of Alaska vanished.
In 2004 the first ever hurricane in Brazil in the southern hemisphere,
Hurrcane Vince landed in Huelve, Spain, the first tropical cyclone ever recorded in Europe.
So what? Most of this stuff would have happened anyway. This is the big problem with the current debate, too much of it is based on confirmation bias. The real evidence will come not now, but in the coming centuries.
It seem you are implying that corruption cannot happen in the free market without government involvement. The government is a tool, just like guns. The biggest evil bogeymen are the ones that use that tool to do evil, which are typically corporations.
Government agencies are corporations with sovereign immunity.
Until we can produce a case of a planet where the temperature rose 1.5 degrees and civilization got into trouble, then there is absolutely no reason to just go for it and see.
Well, Earth is going to do that. So we'll have our test case. But what reason is there to expect that we'll see trouble from such a small rise in temperature?
What ever happened to scientific curiosity? Doesn't anybody want to know what will happen if we heat up the planet?
Last I looked, scientific curiosity hasn't gone anywhere. It's still there, should you decide to reach for it. And add me to the list of people who would like to know, beforehand, what happens when we "heat up the planet".
so a free market requires government regulation
No, a free market requires regulation, but it can self-regulate as well.
but again, this is an argument against corruption, not against government. again, the problem with regulatory capture is large market players corrupting the rules. so you want to heal your sick government, not weaken it further, thereby giving large market players yet even more ways to abuse you. and they will
This argument doesn't make sense. Corruption happens because governments and their agents have power that they can readily monetize. So it is better to give them more power that they can monetize further? Or perhaps convert to even nobler coin such as establishing a tyranny?
but certain people, they just utterly lack the awareness that the government is not the only evil bogeyman in the world. many times in fact, like regulatory capture, the government isn't really the ultimate bogeyman, but just the front for the real villains: plutocracy
They are by far the biggest, evil bogeymen out there.
Conservatives need to come to the table with solutions
You need problems first in order to have solutions. For example, this article is about how 1.5 C rise in temperature is supposed to be bad with all sorts of "negative impacts", but there's no actual evidence for the claim. Providing solutions to non-problems doesn't help anyone.
Nor do we have a sane plan for keeping temperature rise below 1.5 C. Note that you won't get the US, China, Russia, or OPEC on board.
But you remember Ukraine ONLY, not North Caucasus, not Volga region. Why?
Because most of the deaths were Ukrainian as reported by Wikipedia's sources. And Ukrainians would have died elsewhere than just in the Ukraine. A lot of people had been moved around during this period.
Second, I find it interesting that considerable argument has been put forth that there was a weather/climate contribution to the Holodomor, but no one can say what this contribution was. Along this vein, I see no evidence that Romania was suffering from this famine despite being right next to the Ukraine. Instead, their cereal production was higher in 1933 (which would have been the peak of the famine) than in 1932, despite a nasty economic depression.