Usually our sunsets, especially in fall, are just ho-hum sun in a clear blue sky sinking into the ocean sort of sunsets. It's not bad, of course, but nothing like the sunsets above (taken from my upper deck) with fast moving low violet-grey clouds zipping past a brilliant yellow, orange and red high cloud 180-degree background panorama (my phone camera just doesn't come close to doing it justice).
So I guess this is the silver (or yellow/orange/red) lining to the hurricane cloud.
69 comments:
If you look at the sunset picture I posted a couple of weeks ago, you can see how far south the sunset has moved in that time. In the previous picture, the sun set well to the right of the chimney. In this picture, it was pretty much directly over the chimney.
Indeed, that big yellow blob is coming to us Southerners.
Meanwhile, Erp is below water in her home, in order to pay for your fancy sunset...
I hope you're wrong about erp. Have you heard from her?
We're okay, just out of power at home and staying at a hotel for the duration. They don't have full power here so services are intermittent, hence internet connections are spotty.
Here's a question for the geniuses among us. Why can't Verizon carry its share of the burden of keeping my i-pad functional wherever I happen to be within a couple of mile area?
Ditto my paleo t-mobile cell phone. It falls into a fugue for no apparent reason and can't remember that it's one and only function is to make and receive telephone calls. It's so annoying. Half my friends and relatives will never talk to me again because I can't return messages, emails or telephone calls and never mind the agony of not being au courant with the news of the world.
The storm didn't hit us too badly. Our house is flooded, but it's only a question of time and treasure to restore it to its former majestic splendor and I love the pictures of the sunset from your deck Bret. Keep them coming.
erp,
I'm really glad to hear you're okay!
I hope your home repair goes as smoothly as possible.
Erp,
It looks like both Verizon and T-Mobile aren't covering your region very well then.
Ask your neighbors which carriers they use and if they have been experiencing the same black hole areas...
Erp,
By the way, just to be provocative, I would like to ask you the following:
Suppose someone could prove, beyond a shadow of doubt, the hurricane that hit your home was a consequence of man made climate change. [Yeah, I am building upon the polemics about people doing such a claim, and I am aware how problematic it is - just take that position as an exercise in hypotheticals]
Would you feel any different about the loss (and all the bother) you had?
Clovis,
Hurricane Irma and its path are the exact consequence of exactly everything that came before it, from climate change (man-made or otherwise) to butterflies flapping their wings at a certain moments in time.
So in some sense, the exact amount of man made climate change was indeed required for hurricane Irma's formation and path to erp's neighborhood.
Therefore, erp would've been better served by either less man made climate change or MORE man made climate change. In other words, she would've also been better served if the world hadn't tried to address global warming at all.
Bret,
Hey, you are ruining my hypotheticals.
No, the idea is that Irma was made due to our ecological sins, and that more sins would only make more hurricanes.
The simple question then is, would you repent? Or would you judge it was worth it anyway?
Clovis, you, like most of us, believe the world began at our birth.
I've lived through many theories and postulations. Over the years, various foods, butter for one, have gone from healthy to horror and back many times and at an earlier time the left were beating their gums about acid rain caused by the factories in our mid-west killing forests in northern Europe, the imminent new ice age arriving any day, the ozone layer was being depleted by spray deodorants, Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" causing the deaths of millions of third world people, population explosions causing global starvation, lots more attempts by the left to focus weak minds on the stuff and nonsense of man-made catastrophes instead of on what is really killing us which is crony capitalism between the one worlders and the enormous power and wealth of the new robber barons for whom, for some reason, the bad old words like monopoly, exploitation, anti-trust laws and other such anachronisms don't seem to apply even though their control of our lives is so scary, it does actually cause me nightmares of an earth of elites and their borgs which should terrify even academics.
That said, pray tell, how or what could I or any other puny human could do to effect the earth's climate or the sun's flares and sun spots or events on other planets and suns ... that would lead me to repent?
Re: Hurricanes.
I guess we humans would have been safer had we burrowed in and lived in nests as the animals do, but somehow, we evolved :-( into creatures who look to the stars as a destination and long to live in places with gorgeous views like Bret's new digs and chose to live as fully as we can while dealing with the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune."
Safety is over-rated when it causes people to lived like frightened rabbits.
That said, I still am not looking forward to cleaning up the current mess, but will keep my kvetching to a minimum.
There is practically no action of mine for which I repent, other than not being effective enough perhaps in our ability to help those more needy than we.
Clovis wrote: "...that more sins would only make more hurricanes. The simple question then is, would you repent?"
That would depend on how many more hurricanes, of course.
Ten hurricanes hammering San Diego every single day? Yes, I would "repent."
One more hurricane ever in the existence of the universe? No, I would not "repent."
Bret, instead of repenting, why not just stop sending all that bad weather all around the world especially where little old ladies live. s/off
Erp,
---
That said, pray tell, how or what could I or any other puny human could do to effect the earth's climate or the sun's flares and sun spots or events on other planets and suns ... that would lead me to repent?
---
I repent asking you to assume a few hypotheticals in order to answer a question. Apparently, that's a task beyond your generosity.
---
for some reason, the bad old words like monopoly, exploitation, anti-trust laws and other such anachronisms don't seem to apply even though their control of our lives is so scary, it does actually cause me nightmares of an earth of elites and their borgs which should terrify even academics.
---
If I well remember, you were of the opinion that anti-trust laws were socialist tools for govt to meddle with our perfect markets. What made you change your mind?
Bret,
---
Ten hurricanes hammering San Diego every single day? Yes, I would "repent."
One more hurricane ever in the existence of the universe? No, I would not "repent."
---
That's an interesting answer, for it begs the question: where would you draw the line from one case to the other?
Like, "five more hurricanes in California per year, fine, but six more hurricanes? No way!"
Clovis,
I've no idea where that line is. What I do know is that we're extremely far from it back here in reality (as opposed to within your hypothetical). I'll let you know if we ever get close enough to that line that I can perceive it.
Clovis, you're right, I am against government interfering and colluding with private enterprise aka fascism. My point is that in the case of the new robber barons, anything goes because they are of one mind with the one worlders and that is control of us. The fascists won.
Erp asks me to post this link, bashing environmental sciences, while she is out of power due to enviromental causes:
http://lidblog.com/greenhouse-gasses/
Bret,
I do agree we are far from demonstrably high correlation, but there are people worried enough with the correlation they already see.
Excluding the cases with second intentions and religious fervor behind it, they probably put that line far closer than you do.
In the end, the decision about that line, as usual for so many other things, should be put to public decabe and democratic vote - or not?
Erp,
Let me see if I understand your point.
You are against anti-trust laws and bashing monopolies as long as they do not display political/social opinions you dislike?
Clovis. No. Reread my previous comment.
Erp,
I did and concluded the same. Or can you point out specific events, facts and actions undertaken by those companies so they now deserve govt induced break up whereas you were against it previously?
Clovis wrote: "the decision about that line ... should be put to public decabe [debate?] and democratic vote - or not?"
Sure, within the constraints of the legislative, executive and judicial processes, and hopefully within the constraints of the constitution, where that line is and what to do about it will be based on democracy and where I think that line is will have absolutely no bearing on anything.
And there is public debate. Unfortunately, like most things, in my opinion, in the political sphere, the debate is about money, power, prestige, etc., and then waaaay down at the bottom of the list, the well-being of the people may possibly be considered.
For example, Al Gore's net worth is around $200 million, most of which he earned jetting around doing this climate crusade thing. His wealth and power are now astounding. Well played, Al, well played! But that jetting around creates a lot of CO2 and his mansion uses enough electricity to power a small town, so I rather doubt, from his actions, that saving the planet is something he actually cares about.
Clovis, I repeat ... I AM AGAINST government interring with private enterprise and am pointing out that fascists in government who in an earlier period railed against monopolies, etc. and labeled industrialists, robber barons, now distribute our tax money to those who share their world view of a world consisting of elites, them and Borg, us.
Erp,
Can you name names? You now cite "fascists in governemnt", but the topic was about fascists in companies - what companies you want to apply anti-trust laws now, and why?
Bret,
I get the hypocrisy, but are you sure Al Gore got rich with his global warming powerpoints? I understand he owns a few businesses and most of his fortune comes from them.
Clovis,
You're right. Gore did not directly get rich from his powerpoints or even the movie. The fame and power from those endeavors probably didn't hurt his other dealings however. Though I supposed as ex-vice-president he already had a fair amount of fame and power.
Clovis, are you deliberately being obstreperous? Elon Musk has raked in billions of tax dollars for his companies as did all the other "renewable" energy companies many, if not, all of which went south as quickly as their proponents spent our money on the modern version of Wine, Women and Song.
Again, government has an important role to play in the U.S. and that's to maintain an even playing field, inforcing the rule of law ... there is no provision in the Constitution for tax payers to bail out failing companies, encourage people by giving them tax breaks to play along with whatever is the latest lefty cracked brain idea ...
NASA just made the cut because it was sold at the time as national defense as well as space exploration.
Erp,
OMG, Erp, 'obstreperous'? Thanks for the lesson of this new word.
Either I am being obstreperous and obtuse, or you are not making much sense at all. Elon Musk does not have a monopoly in most of his businesses. How would you apply anti-trust on him?
I am not applying anti-trust to him, I am applying crony capitalism to him and a lot of others.
Well said.
FTA
Despite all the government's fretting about dominance and monopolies, the toy chain's ability to control the toy market was always exaggerated. As University of Chicago business economics professor Dennis Carlton explained in a 1999 paper, "there are few, if any, barriers to entry or expansion in toy retailing. In addition, any number of retailers — including warehouse clubs — can, and do, rapidly expand their toy departments in response to fluctuations in demand."
This is, of course, the case with most other so-called monopolists, whose grip on the market is wildly exaggerated, and who usually fall from grace right about the time that pundits and government bureaucrats decide they've gotten too big and too powerful. Think IBM (IBM) and Microsoft (MSFT). (In fact, the only enduring monopolies in the U.S. are those protected by government.
Erp,
Let me help you here by explaining the time line.
Upon asking for the anti-trust books being thrown upon some companies you didn't even name, I've asked why you changed your mind. You followed with answers that made no sense.
Now you come back showing renewed arguments against anti-trust laws, confirming you don't like them, but still can't explain which companies should be punished by it for 'having too much control over your life', for as you said:
---
what is really killing us which is crony capitalism between the one worlders and the enormous power and wealth of the new robber barons for whom, for some reason, the bad old words like monopoly, exploitation, anti-trust laws and other such anachronisms don't seem to apply even though their control of our lives is so scary,
---
The only name you offered, Elon Musk, has very little present control over your life.
Please provide a quote of my asking for anti-trust laws to be thrown at anybody.
I think Elon Musk is an incredibly interesting phenomenon. His ability to organize technological ventures is a 6+ sigma anomaly in my opinion.
Part of that organization involves providing access to necessary resources and part of that, especially for Tesla and SpaceX, has been government resources in the form of subsidies and direct funding (grants or direct purchases). Neither Tesla nor SpaceX had any chance for survival without those, at least not in their current form and/or extent.
Government subsidies and funding are borne by the taxpayer. So it turns out that Elon Musk has more control over taxpayers' lives than the vast majority of people.
Bret,
---
So it turns out that Elon Musk has more control over taxpayers' lives than the vast majority of people.
---
The comparative is deceitful there. He may have more control than the vast majority of people, and yet such a little control that is.
The subsidies he got are, compared to US GDP or US govt tax revenues, a very, very small figure.
Furthermore, I did not dispute the possibility of crony capitalism on his businesses. It is the anti-trust matter I was asking about.
Erp: I just did, my last message quoted it entirely.
My point rather clumsily made is that modern industrialists get money from taxpayers because they are politically affiliated with the one-worlders aka fascists. They are not considered robber barons as were the old industrialists who were, in fact, mostly very conservative and who received virtually no public funds, but had unions sicced on them.
I will invest my funds as I wish and don't need Soros et al. to manipulate their political theories with which I vehemently disagree with my hard earned money.
Here's an example of how it works.
Erp,
Would you take the time to explain to me how Kellogs profits from public funds by giving money to Hispanic-connected social organizations, as your link shows?
Are Hispanics such a powerful group in the US, by which funds directed to them will give Kellogs subsidies or taxpayer money in return?
Since you often boast about your dot connecting prowess, please give me a hand here.
It's the connection to Soros and his leftwing causes to which I object. People who buy Kellogg cereals and other products don't realize they are funding the kinds of unrest and divisiveness that is becoming commonplace.
Erp,
So go on and tell me how giving mooney to Soros foundations end up giving Kellog access to taxpayer money...?
These foundations get tax breaks for doing “good” works.
More on how tax payers are paying for it all.
More on why the government should stick to its knitting as directed by the Constitution and let free enterprise sink or swim on its merits.
Erp,
It doesn't look like Kellogg had any tax breaks for giving money to that Soros Foundation, in particular.
Had they donated to Trump Foundation, for example, would you still care?
That 's an argument not worthy of JHS kids. I
Erp,
Of course you will run from the argument, for the point is not that you are against Big Corp candies, as long as they play for your preferred cronies.
Ridiculous. I have repeatedly said I am against any government interference outside the constitutional responsibilities. I haven't had any cronies in government since Jefferson.
No, erp, you only show aversion to cronysm when it is connected to politics you dislike, mainly Democrats.
Upon seeing this article, I could not help but remember of our many discussions here.
It helps me to understand why Harry believes Erp and Skipper are 'racists' (his words - he said he won't come back to GG due to that belief, and kind of expelled Skipper from his blog.)
Harry's arguments don't hold up. That's why he can't converse with those of us who believe it is racist to support AA and the teachers' unions who state that black kids can't learn arithmetic or English grammar or to vote for a candidate based on enhanced melanin.
Who are the crony capitalists I believe deserve our tax dollars?
Did you read the article, Erp?
Clovis wrote: "The comparative is deceitful there."
Deceitful? I assure you it was not my intent to deceive. :-)
Bret,
Does the word "deceitful" imply intent? If so, that was not my intent :-)
deceitful
adjective
1.
given to deceiving
2.
intended to deceive; misleading;
--------------
The first definition is kinda circular, the 2nd definition has "intended" as the first word. If one follows the circular definition, I don't think my statements quite qualify as deceitful.
While "misleading" is given as a synonym, but I think it's a superset of "deceitful." If I write a statement that might lead someone to a false conclusion but I didn't do it intentionally, then it's misleading. If I did it intentionally, then it's both misleading and deceitful.
But I'm not a vocabulary expert, so what I just wrote may not be correct. Or, more accurately, it's correct for what I mean and I think I've described common usage, but I may be wrong.
Thanks for the lesson, Bret.
Though, if we are going through all the subtleties here, I wrote "The comparative is deceitful there". I would be accusing the comparative, not you, of being deceitful. Can it acquit me?
Good question. I would say only sentient entities can be deceitful and a comparative is not sentient.
[Clovis:] It helps me to understand why Harry believes Erp and Skipper are 'racists' (his words - he said he won't come back to GG due to that belief, and kind of expelled Skipper from his blog.)
Harry is a flagrant, unrepentant, liar.
And the article to which you linked is absolutely no help in providing understanding why Harry believes erp & I are racists, for exactly the same reason why this discussion was completely fruitless. Harry promiscuously slings that nasty slur about, and has never, not even once, given the courtesy of substantiating it.
(Moreover, Harry's charge is particularly rich, considering this: I've said all along that I do not believe that Muslims in general and Arab Muslims in particular are capable of popular self-government.)
Just so here. You say this article helps you understand. Ok. How, exactly? Which parts of it, compared to things erp or I actually said, yields such a thing?
Having read that article, and the comments, in detail, I am utterly at sea as to help you diagnose Harry's beliefs (your words), as opposed to erp's or my statements. So please, by all means, help me out here.
(BTW, Harry expelled my from his blog because he got tired of being called out for his ignorant mistakes and outright lies — of which, on request, I can provide hundreds of references. He just tossed out the r-word as a pretext.)
[Clovis:] Suppose someone could prove, beyond a shadow of doubt, the hurricane that hit your home was a consequence of man made climate change.
Would you feel any different about the loss (and all the bother) you had?
There is a serious problem with your hypothetical: it is contrafactual. Not impossible, in the sense that proof of such a thing could, in theory, exist; but, in fact, impossible to obtain. Rather, it is contrafactual because it presumes the potential existence of something — changes in hurricanes due to climate change — which does not exist at all.
According to NOAA, thus far there has been absolutely no detectable trend in the location, severity, or quantity of hurricanes due to any climate change that has occurred so far.
None. Nada. Zilch.
Might as well pose this to erp: Suppose there were flying pigs. How much would you spend on steel umbrellas?
What Skipper said. As for the the flying pigs, they wouldn't bother me if they didn't poop on my head.
Yeah, flying seagulls are bad enough on the poop front. Though flying pigs would be kinda cool!
I'm actually thinking of automating a drone such that everytime a seafull comes near my decks, it takes off and drives them away. It'd have to be a BIG drone to drive away a flying pig!
Skipper,
---
There is a serious problem with your hypothetical: it is contrafactual.
---
That can't possibly be a problem. By definition, hypotheticals need to have no relation to facts or reality.
Were I interested on Erp's opinion on pigs flying, I would as easily ask.
What problem do you see with hypothetical discussions, if that's what the speaker intended?
Skipper,
---
Having read that article, and the comments, in detail, I am utterly at sea as to help you diagnose Harry's beliefs (your words), as opposed to erp's or my statements. So please, by all means, help me out here.
---
It is a long article, and I am not sure I remember now all the relevant passages, but below I quote one of them.
I guess I've meant that Harry, upon detecting the contradictions posed below - which are part of yours, and Erp's, discourse in previous discussions we had (to the best of my memory) - I can understand why he may end up believing his charge of racism.
Notice I am not saying this validates his charges though.
Quote of the article:
----
But there are ways to neglect black liberty that are subtler than the white nationalism of the Confederatistas. Think about the different ways that market liberals and libertarians talk about “welfare” from how they talk about other kinds of government redistribution. There’s no talk of the culture of dependence among farmers, although they receive far more government aid per capita than do the urban poor. Libertarians absolutely and clearly oppose corporate welfare, but they don’t do so in the paternalistic language that corporate welfare recipients are morally hurt by being on the dole. The white welfare state of the 1930s-60s that channeled government support for, e.g., housing, urban development, and higher education through segregated institutions has a way of disappearing from the historical memory; the degrees earned and homes bought get remembered as hard work contributing to the American dream. But too many libertarians and their market-oriented allies among postwar conservatives treated the more racially inclusive welfare state of the 1960s and 70s as different in kind. White recipients of housing subsidies hadn’t been imagined to become dependent, non-autonomous, or unfree. When the FHA was insisting that neighborhoods be segregated in order to be eligible for mortgage or building subsidies, it contributed a great deal to the racial wealth gap that persists to this day. No free-marketeers of the era felt the need to engage in brave, politically incorrect inquiries into the lower intelligence of new white homeowners that might explain their long-term dependence. But once the imagined typical welfare recipient was a black mother, welfare became a matter not just of economic or constitutional concern but of moral panic about parasites, fraud, and the long-term collapse of self-reliance.
----
Bret,
---
I'm actually thinking of automating a drone such that everytime a seafull comes near my decks, it takes off and drives them away. It'd have to be a BIG drone to drive away a flying pig!
---
Hey, now that's an interesting idea. I guess you could as well patent it and make some money too.
Bret, make your drone look like a flying pig, and put me down for a couple and add a poop on command feature please.
Clovis, in order for a hypothetical to be of any interest, there must something that makes sense. I don't know where you got the sentences you quote and I don't care. I am against the government giving our tax dollars to anyone or entity. Government's duties and responsibilities are spelled out and there is no reason for public servants step outside of them.
Clovis wrote: "I guess you could as well patent it and make some money too."
Possibly. A closely related product already exists in somewhat rudimentary form. Birds are an ENORMOUS problem for farmers, especially for berries and related edibles. So there are products that are drones that are pre-programmed to go to a bunch of way-points while emitting sounds that predators of those birds make. They help some, but you either need a lot of drones or the birds just go wherever the drone isn't. (Prior to drones, many farmers would build falcon nests to entice birds-of-prey to come nest there and drive off the parasitic birds and they still do this.)
My version of the product would use vision to detect the birds and keep harassing them until they were beyond some range (i.e. away from my decks). The same product could be more efficient than the existing bird drones for farmers because it would only expend energy on being aloft when there're actually birds to chase.
I'm guessing it's not patentable though. Too many of the pieces are too obvious and/or already in existence. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad product. Patents aren't all that critical for products like these.
erp,
LOL!
You know, I just might do that. Farmers have a limited sense of humor generally, but I think that would be exactly in the sweet spot of their sense of humor.
If I do the flying pig anti-bird drone and it sells, I'll send you a (smallish) check.
Though I suppose I'd have to send Skipper a check as well since he first mentioned the flying pig idea on this thread.
I don't want a check, large or small, I want a flying pig drone and you can name it erp (electronic removal pig).
Someone's already made one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMeA_3Z2foE
But I can do better! :-)
Looking forward to the Bret model.
Post a Comment