|
2013
Feb 3, 2013 20:25:28 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 3, 2013 20:25:28 GMT 10
Ha! I love it www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-03/pyne-likens-government-disarray-to-hitler-film/4498268Opposition frontbencher Christopher Pyne says the Federal Government is starting to resemble a scene from Downfall, a movie about the collapse of Hitler's Third Reich. I have a sense of humor, and I think that's hillarious. I particularly like the bit where people realise that this means the liberal party are the russians advancing on berlin, and that means ...
|
|
|
2013
Feb 3, 2013 20:47:02 GMT 10
Post by jack on Feb 3, 2013 20:47:02 GMT 10
And unless I'm mistaken, Mr Pyne seems to believe Hitler's bunker was in Summer Bay.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 3, 2013 22:04:18 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 3, 2013 22:04:18 GMT 10
As everyone should know by now, obama has released a photo of him firing some sort of long arm: I'm not sure why he bothered. It's not like evidence has satisfied his critics in the past. The chief creep at the NRA has already scoffed at it (one assumes that obama would actually have to shoot a human being to impress that guy). But this raises an interesting question: Has anyone yet tried to claim that the picture is a fake? Have the "skeeters" formulated any theories about how it couldn't have possibly happened the way the "official story" claims?
|
|
|
2013
Feb 4, 2013 18:38:27 GMT 10
Post by angra on Feb 4, 2013 18:38:27 GMT 10
I don't know if anyone noticed this, but Victoria Coren takes a swipe at Miriam Margoyles in today's Guardian, for taking out Australian citizenship. www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/03/great-reasons-to-leave-britainThe comments are fun. To be sexist both women are extremely talented and beautiful, but Victoria has a tongue that can strike a man dead at 20 paces with one lash. However Miriam is a supreme actress which Victoria is not. And to be completely elitist, my family once rented Miriam's villa in Tuscany for the most perfect Italian holiday. So stuff that up your underpants Andrew! And welcome to Australia Miriam! We are enriched by you being here.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 6, 2013 13:42:05 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 6, 2013 13:42:05 GMT 10
Bolt is spruiking some rubbish written by janet albrechtsen People power defeated Roxon's radical agendawww.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/people-power-defeated-roxons-radical-agenda/story-e6frg7bo-1226571127430She uses what has to be the most watered-down, woeful attempt at a deniable weasel: For example, there was a disappointing lack of curiosity among many journalists at our national broadcaster. Who can recall a senior ABC journalist discussing in any detail the serious ramifications of Roxon's bill? Notice that she doesn't try to claim that aunty DIDN'T respond, but merely asks if anyone can recall. Because the ABC did respond. In fact, its chairman responded: www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-10/abc-chairman-fears-for-freedom-of-speech/4419770And yes, I can find plenty of criticism and discussion of the bill on the ABC web site - from broadcast programs, online news, political coverage and on the drum. No, it didn't create any astroturf web sites and man the barricades, but that's because that sort of thing is not in its charter. To suggest that the ABC had no criticism for roxon's anti-discrimination changes is just plain false. Which is, one presumes, why janet doesn't actually say that. She just implies it. But that's ok, because bolta can talk that up, and it becomes (in the mind of people who don't need evidence when they can simply feel the truth) a fact. And the nation becomes just that tiny bit less informed. Brought to you by The Australian.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 7, 2013 8:18:35 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 7, 2013 8:18:35 GMT 10
January:
|
|
|
2013
Feb 7, 2013 17:39:22 GMT 10
Post by angra on Feb 7, 2013 17:39:22 GMT 10
But Andrew isn't convinced. "Yes, Craig, there really is a warming pause." First posted a few days ago, then this morning paywalled, and this arvo released to all the free world. "Dr Karl, let me repeat, presents science on the ABC - and BBC, too. His employers pay him to spread this misconception"
And he again conveniently ignores basic statistics. He takes as his starting point 1997/8 which as you can see from the graph MoC posted was the height of an El Nino event. Why not take your graph series back to the '70's Andrew or even earlier? Because it doesn't fit your deliberate and persistent misinterpretation of basic maths?
What a dork.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 7, 2013 20:18:38 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 7, 2013 20:18:38 GMT 10
John Brennan's about to get grilled for confirmation as CIA directory swampland.time.com/2013/02/06/what-senators-should-ask-cia-nominee-john-brennan/And this is going to make it REALLY interesting to watch: online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324906004578288411143973612.htmlWASHINGTON—On the eve of a battle to confirm his pick for America's CIA chief, President Barack Obama agreed Wednesday to let a small group of lawmakers look at a long-sought, classified Justice Department opinion explaining his administration's legal justification for targeting killings of American terror suspects in other countries. Yeah. Pretty astonishing stuff. Obama should perhaps be getting hammered a lot harder for this stuff. Drone strikes would seem to be his abu ghraib - the poster-image for recruiting bad guys in the badlands of pakistan.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 7, 2013 21:23:09 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 7, 2013 21:23:09 GMT 10
"But Andrew isn't convinced."
But that doesn't ultimately matter. Reality goes on regardless.
The temps will start going up again, even bolta knows that. Which is why he's adding little disclaimers saying that he doesn't mean to say that warming WON'T continue. Because it pretty obviously is going to, it's just that right now the mainstream de-warmeninist crowd actually has something concrete to point at - a little isolated time-series of data where the numbers aren't going up as they're "supposed to be". It's happened before, but that wasn't THIS time.
It's a nice change from just smearing and attacking scientists, going through their mail, trying to get them investigated, sacked, defunded, sued. For a couple of years they get to use the official lingo - statistical significance. And it all ends the moment the temperature spikes up above the 1998 anomaly. And it will.
Patience ;-)
|
|
|
2013
Feb 7, 2013 22:03:52 GMT 10
Post by jack on Feb 7, 2013 22:03:52 GMT 10
" First posted a few days ago, then this morning paywalled..." Sorry, been a bit busy today, but... Isn't Andy's effort today the polished-up print version of an older * blog post? Only without the embarrassing dodgy graphs? woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1997/to:2013/plot/rss/from:1998/to:2000/trend__________ * I can't specifically nominate which blog post, due to rubbery time-stamps (complementing the rubbery logic).
|
|
|
2013
Feb 8, 2013 7:52:24 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 8, 2013 7:52:24 GMT 10
Regarding the "and another thing" post ... I think that what happened there is that bolter took a swipe at dr karl and was smacked down by a "third generation canberra public servant". At that point, he was pretty much on the back foot, but then karl posted something that was, let's say, a bit of a stretch (the .3 degrees in 16 years thing). Bolta saw his chance to have the last word again and went all I-was-right-all-along-and-you-were-wrong-so-there-for-ever-and-ever-ha-ha-no-backsies, and even turned it into a column for all the world to see. Dr Karl beautifully demonstrated why twitter is problematic - it encourages people to post off-the-cuff thoughts, thinking that they're just to the people they're directed at in the mind of the poster, and without double-triple-checking. It also demonstrates another awkward feature of twitter - one can't quietly edit the post later and make like nothing happened, and you don't get to pick and choose which responses are seen by one's readers. I'm not talking about anyone in particular, obviously. As for the .3 degrees, well ... it's not entirely indefensible. For example: skepticalscience.com/foster-and-rahmstorf-measure-global-warming-signal.html
|
|
|
2013
Feb 8, 2013 8:15:56 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 8, 2013 8:15:56 GMT 10
Oooh, I see that the get-karl thing is still going today. I also see that andrew's trying to box in dr karl with this: Dr Karl, debating the figures of Britain’s Met, asserts the world has warmed 0.3 degrees in 16 years - which still isn’t that much, actually.
But the Met’s figures, as tweeter Bill correctly informs him, actually show a warming just one-sixth of what Dr Karl claimed. That is so small that scientists say it’s statistically insignificant. It’s indistinguishable from background noise. Essentially zero.
Just in case there is any doubt about what the Met figures show, here is the Met in its own words, excuses and all: Nope, sorry andrew. Karl is not constrained to the met's analysis. Your guys chose that as their reference point, karl didn't. He simply said that the world is warming, and gave his (questionable, I agree) .3 degrees figure. There is nothing in the context or in what dr karl said that implies that he had to be talking about the met's figures. We actually don't know what his reference was. I don't think he should have gone with the .3 claim. But if he wanted to, I think there are ways that he could use to dig himself out of this hole. This being one: skepticalscience.com/foster-and-rahmstorf-measure-global-warming-signal.htmlIt's wrong to engage in bullshit sophistry and disingenuous argument, but ... I didn't choose the rules. This reminds me of the appalling series of posts that bolt made about richard dawkins. I think he's probably on safer ground this time, at least where karl's later post is concerned, but it's still not a pretty picture. Comparisons suggest themselves, but I'll leave those unposted.
|
|
|
2013
Feb 8, 2013 8:33:21 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 8, 2013 8:33:21 GMT 10
This sporting ACC drug thing.
I'm not really interested in sports. I didn't even know that there was an investigation. I'm just listening to the BBC coverage of it though, and it occurs to me that the more important impact of these findings isn't going to be domestic.
Once the schadenfreude from whoever our sporting rivals are subsides, people are going to start asking questions in other countries.
Given the fairly astonishing revelations of recent years, I'm wondering if an adage I read in Don Stewart's biography can be reapplied to professional sport:
There are two kinds of sporting codes. The ones with drug problems, and the ones that don't look for it.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
2013
Feb 8, 2013 20:24:47 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 8, 2013 20:24:47 GMT 10
|
|
|
2013
Feb 9, 2013 7:44:31 GMT 10
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Feb 9, 2013 7:44:31 GMT 10
It only just occurred to me last night.
There's one more budget before the election. Swan's going to get to hand in a projected surplus. To a certain way of thinking, that's the only economic indicator that matters.
|
|