Page 374 of 377 FirstFirst ... 274324364372373374375376 ... LastLast
Results 5,596 to 5,610 of 5643
  1. #5596
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    13,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Companies get delisted all the time. It just means that their shares will not be traded on that stock exchange. It's a strange penalty, but nowhere near as serious as you're suggesting.
    For large companies it is a very serious penalty obviously...not to mention that I've never heard of a company being de-listed due to such reasons.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #5597
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,381
    New Earth Mission Will Track Rising Oceans Into 2030
    NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

    Earth's climate is changing, and the study of oceans is vital to understanding the effects of those changes on our future. For the first time, U.S. and European agencies are preparing to launch a 10-year satellite mission to continue to study the clearest sign of global warming — rising sea levels. The Sentinel-6/Jason-CS mission (short for Jason-Continuity of Service), will be the longest-running mission dedicated to answering the question: How much will Earth's oceans rise by 2030?

    By 2030, Sentinel-6/Jason-CS will add to nearly 40 years of sea level records, providing us with the clearest, most sensitive measure of how humans are changing the planet and its climate. ...

  3. #5598
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,754
    Watch: John Stossel Destroys Climate Change Myths in Terrific Video
    Nick Arama, Redstate, 24 Nov 2019

    Stossel noted how over the years he’d covered so many scares that had turned out not to be what people claimed, that in fact, we’re living longer than ever.

    Yet the alarmists like Greta Thunberg say “entire ecosystems are collapsing” and we are on the brink of “mass extinction.” Politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and former Vice President Joe Biden proclaim, “We have 12 years years left.”

    The scientists took on that myth. “Please, let’s have a discussion!” begged astrophysicist Willie Soon.

    Pat Michaels, former president of the American Association of State Climatologists, dissected the 12 year/extinction claim. “It’s warmed up around one degree Celsius since 1900, and life expectancy doubled, yet that temperature ticks up another half a degree and the entire system crashes? That’s the most absurd belief.”

    And what happens when in all likelihood we’re all still here in pretty much the same condition in 12 years?

    Climatology Professor David Legates predicted, “In twelve years it’ll be 12 more years.”

    Another myth? Government can somehow save us.

    “The Obama’s administration’s model projects that the amount of global warming that would be saved going to zero emissions tomorrow … would be 14 hundredths of a degree Celsius,” according to Michaels.

    An insignificant difference for global warning. But a killer for the country. “You’ll sure have an impoverished dark country,” he said.

    But, as Stossel observes, the other side doesn’t want to debate, they just want to impose their will, without question.

    So why are politicians so eager to push all this on us? One word: control.

    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  4. #5599
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,216
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    For large companies it is a very serious penalty obviously...not to mention that I've never heard of a company being de-listed due to such reasons.
    I doubt that any major company would fail to comply. And companies are delisted for a variety of reasons: "The reasons for its removal included corporate governance concerns, failure to inform the market of successful legal proceedings against one of its subsidiaries and completing the transfer of shares in a subsidiary without shareholder approval."

  5. #5600
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    ... Nick Arama, Redstate, 24 Nov 2019 ...
    The scientists took on that myth. “Please, let’s have a discussion!” begged astrophysicist Willie Soon. ... But, as Stossel observes, the other side doesn’t want to debate, they just want to impose their will, without question....
    Anytime you want to discuss the laws of physics, I'm ready!

  6. #5601
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    13,314
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  7. #5602
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    13,314
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Would you consider this to be an academic paper?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  8. #5603
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,216
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Would you consider this to be an academic paper?
    I assume that question is directed to yourself?

  9. #5604
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,381
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Would you consider this to be an academic paper?
    No. Does NoTricksZone sound like an academic peer-reviewed journal?

  10. #5605
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,381
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    The article cherry-picks 14 pre-2015 ECS climate sensitivity studies to show a 'decreasing trend'.

    Compare this with 96 pre-2015 ECS studies used by Carbon Brief based on data from a 2017 Nature Geoscience paper by Prof Reto Knutti and colleagues at ETH Zurich:

    Climate sensirity timeline.jpg
    Compilation of climate sensitivity studies adapted from Knutti et al 2017 and extended through March 2019 based on a Google Scholar search of “climate sensitivity” and consultation with researchers. Dots show the best estimate of sensitivity from each study, which may be mean, median, or other metric, depending on the study. Bars show the uncertainty range, which may be one sigma, 90%, or two sigma depending on the study. The black dotted line represents a smoothed LOESS fit to the best estimates, while the grey range shows similar fits to the high and low estimates.

    ....The range of sensitivity across all of these studies has likely narrowed slightly over time, though the average has remained fairly close to 3C. Contrary to claims on a number of climate sceptic websites, there is no evidence of any downward trend in sensitivity in recent years when all studies are considered.
    - Carbon Brief

  11. #5606
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    13,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    The article cherry-picks 14 pre-2015 ECS climate sensitivity studies to show a 'decreasing trend'.

    Compare this with 96 pre-2015 ECS studies used by Carbon Brief based on data from a 2017 Nature Geoscience paper by Prof Reto Knutti and colleagues at ETH Zurich:

    Climate sensirity timeline.jpg
    Compilation of climate sensitivity studies adapted from Knutti et al 2017 and extended through March 2019 based on a Google Scholar search of “climate sensitivity” and consultation with researchers. Dots show the best estimate of sensitivity from each study, which may be mean, median, or other metric, depending on the study. Bars show the uncertainty range, which may be one sigma, 90%, or two sigma depending on the study. The black dotted line represents a smoothed LOESS fit to the best estimates, while the grey range shows similar fits to the high and low estimates.

    ....The range of sensitivity across all of these studies has likely narrowed slightly over time, though the average has remained fairly close to 3C. Contrary to claims on a number of climate sceptic websites, there is no evidence of any downward trend in sensitivity in recent years when all studies are considered.
    - Carbon Brief
    Can I interpret what you are saying as a) this is not an acceptable study and findings should not be considered or b) I disagree with it due to....''cherry-picking'' cases etc? .

    P.S note that at least in this study there are no assumptions as opposed to studies that claim specific climate changes over 300=500 years.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  12. #5607
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,216
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Can I interpret what you are saying as a) this is not an acceptable study and findings should not be considered or b) I disagree with it due to....''cherry-picking'' cases etc? .
    Are you seriously suggesting that it's scientifically acceptable to "cherry-pick" results? The original study was published in the "International Journal of Heat and Technology", hardly a major journal, and not an obvious place to publish articles on climate change - which is enough reason to consider it dubious.

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    P.S note that at least in this study there are no assumptions as opposed to studies that claim specific climate changes over 300=500 years.
    No assumptions!!? So where did the red and blue lines come from? Here's the original paper - there are no details of how they derived those lines, why they used a linear fit to scattered data, or what the errors in that fit are! Just to make my point absolutely clear, fitting data to a straight line involves a huge set of assumptions!

  13. #5608
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,216
    Back in the real world:
    Australia has conceded in an official report that the Great Barrier Reef’s unique values as a world heritage site have been adversely affected by climate change. In the report to Unesco’s world heritage committee, the Queensland and federal governments say the reef is “an icon under pressure with a deteriorating long-term outlook”. ... The report says mass coral bleaching events of 2016 and 2017, together with six tropical cyclones, flood plumes and outbreaks of coral-eating crown-of-thorns starfish “have impacted the [outstanding universal value] of the property since the last State Party Report in 2015”.

  14. #5609
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Anytime you want to discuss the laws of physics, I'm ready!
    No dispute about the laws of physics, but their application, computer modelling, and whether proposed solutions will do more good than harm.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  15. #5610
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,754

    If you want clean energy, then get government out of the way!

    Clean Free Market Policy Beats a Carbon Tax. Here's Why.
    Clean technologies can compete (and win) if barriers to participation are removed.
    JIGAR SHAH AND ROD RICHARDSON, Reason, 2 Dec 2019

    The second and more crucial issue is that a carbon tax does nothing to address the true culprits slowing deployment of clean energy solutions: the real-world monopoly barriers and technological constraints.

    Carbon tax advocates believe fossil fuel penalties will force a shift to clean energy, but that shift is sometimes blocked by closed markets in which arcane rules protect incumbent monopolies. It's also sometimes blocked by the limitations of geography—solar energy thrives in Chile, for example, but it will be more expensive for fewer hours a day in Canada

    Nor would a carbon tax make it easier for entrepreneurs to start auto companies, get vehicles through safety testing, or navigate complex Environmental Protection Agency rules on fuel diversity—the kinds of innovations that are crucial to confronting climate change.

    Given these real world constraints, to trigger a rapid shift from high to low carbon energy, we'd need a very high carbon price—one that would make energy prohibitively expensive, imposing crippling costs on both consumers and businesses. Fear of such high costs sparks opposition. Gridlock has made a carbon tax federally dead on arrival, and thus completely ineffective as a policy proposal.

    There's a third problem, too: All of this is outdated and off-target. Clean energy technologies are now less expensive than fossil fuels. Price is no longer the critical barrier. Technology limitations and politically-imposed market barriers are what's slowing deployment.

    Fortunately, new and better policy tools are at hand.

    If clean technologies can now compete and win, then we need to open closed markets by removing barriers to participation.

    That's the core proposal of clean free market policy. Several free market think tanks (including the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit which publishes Reason) have distilled this insight into The Declaration on Energy Choice & Competition, which calls on government leaders to protect everyone's right to produce, buy, or trade the clean, reliable energy of their choice, and remove barriers to energy competition.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 15 guests)

  1. antichrist

Similar Threads

  1. Evangelism and Climate Change
    By Ian Murray in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-04-2017, 11:24 AM
  2. Climate Change (read bottom up)
    By antichrist in forum Politics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 01:00 PM
  3. Climate Change Is Irreversable ??
    By Bruce Oates in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-01-2009, 09:55 PM
  4. The Death of Climate Change Consensus
    By Spiny Norman in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-12-2007, 11:38 AM
  5. Pentagon Report on Climate Change
    By Cat in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-06-2004, 10:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •