Author Topic: boroda.. your take..  (Read 1135 times)

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: boroda.. your take..
« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2008, 07:40:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by trax1
So your saying Stalin never sent any of his scientist to the gulag?  He was a friend of the scientist.


 I can only advise you to refrain from generalizations and stick to facts.

For example: Semenov wasn;t allowed to attend a first Bomb test in 1949. Now it's being told as a "bloody Soviet regime" (tm) oppressing a great scientist.

Lev Landau was kept in prison for almost a year, but he was released with apologies after Kapitsa wrote a letter to Stalin.

I see all this academic "kitchen" from inside now, and I wish we had someone like JVS cleaning this mess. Fortunately we are not in a pre-war conditions now, but - who knows?...

I hate to see govt sponsoring "torsion fields" research instead of real science. Damn, we got a man here, who gets grants from the UK for declining the Second Law of Thermodynamics... Seriously, i'm not joking.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2008, 07:44:36 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Russian
I doubt it. A nation that lives on oil without investment into technology (aka future) will fail....


Now I hope you see why I don't like our current regime.

They don;t invest even into further oil-field recon. Too expensive. Only USSR could afford it, no privately-owned corporation can. That's why I strongly disagree with Lazs about capitalism/socialism.

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: boroda.. your take..
« Reply #32 on: February 28, 2008, 02:43:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
I think that in the case of science.. we can no longer look to western scientists who have politicized science.. who are potatos for grants and anyone paying them.   the russian ones may be the only ones doing pure science anymore.  
 

Lazs, as a western scientist I can assure you that there are great many western scientists that do not agree with MMGW, or at least claim that CO2 emissions are not the culprit. Every single one of those that I know is not getting any funding from the oil industry. It is actually much easier to get grants if your research is about fighting MMGW (not fighting the idea - fighting the warming).

The impression that the public get as if MMGW is the common conclusion of the science community is completely wrong. It is driven by politics and the mind-numbing media which prefer to report 'exciting news' over balanced and accurate news. Interviewing the people saying that the climate would have been the same even without humans is far less sexy than the 'preacher at the gates' with they doom prophecies.

If you stand up and claim that humans are not responsible for this, the immediate reply would be "then who is?". To answer this you have to go into difficult physics and processes (that is not well understood) that the media would not want to 'bore' the public with. If on the other hand you stand up and claim "humans are responsible", the immediate reply would be "OMG, what can we do about this?". People would tend to accept this clearer and simpler 'cause and effect' much better and move on to the next stage of 'reaction'.

It is not western scientists who are to blame. They do not politicize science as much as politics 'scientified' politics. It is western society that lost any ability of a serious logical discussion.

p.s.
I am not working on global warming.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #33 on: February 28, 2008, 07:36:27 AM »
I recall quoting the Russian results on a GW thread some weeks ago.
It may have been an error in translation, but basically the results were that increasing sunspots (cold areas on the sun's surface) were behind GW.
So, less heat from the sun=GW. Baffling....Must be a wrong translation, but yet, solar activity has been going down or?
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Delirium

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7276
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #34 on: February 28, 2008, 08:23:19 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
Disclaimer: I am only a support personell, technician. But I see "money flows" and I know who gets the money first.

So far repairing floor tiles gets 10 times more money then all IT.


This is a shining example why Russian scientists go to work for the highest bidder in other countries.

You should come to the US, Boroda, you'd make for some very interesting discussions here. :)
Delirium
80th "Headhunters"
Retired AH Trainer (but still teach the P38 selectively)

I found an air leak in my inflatable sheep and plugged the hole! Honest!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #35 on: February 28, 2008, 08:34:52 AM »
bozon.. you should talk to moray..  you are preaching to the choir here with me.  I agree with everything you said.

Thank you and the real scientists for speaking out.

As for russian.. my point is that they don't have a dog in the fight.. they don't care what the liberals or even the western world thinks of them..  if they are "forced" to do something about the harmless gas co2.. they will cry broke and laugh their butts off while we western countries give them "aid to stop global warming"

Their oil resources will still be in demand no matter what happens.. they simply do not have a dog in the fight... they won't do anything for free.  they won't self flagulate like the pious and prissy western countries no matter what the results are.

lazs

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2008, 08:37:06 AM »
angus...  I think that it is important to note that everyone admits that we don't really understand solar activity.. we don't really understand even water vapor... yet...

we are arrogant enough to claim that man is in control of the climate.. the sun.. the water vapor..  these are huge things that we know little about... yet..  co2.. a tiny little variable.. that is causing the earth to warm and cool?

lazs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #37 on: February 28, 2008, 12:36:27 PM »
Au contraire Lazs, I think it is pure arrogance to claim that the composition of the Earth's atmosphere has no effect on temperature, say alone that the earth's surface has no effect on the atmosphere.
That said, the arrogant humans have caused drastic changes on both in a very short leap of time.
BTW,remind me of Krakatau and some others....got some digging to do.
Cheers to the southern states (from snow)...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Clifra Jones

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2008, 01:18:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
I recall quoting the Russian results on a GW thread some weeks ago.
It may have been an error in translation, but basically the results were that increasing sunspots (cold areas on the sun's surface) were behind GW.
So, less heat from the sun=GW. Baffling....Must be a wrong translation, but yet, solar activity has been going down or?


Yes, cooler spots on the sun which cause an increase in solar flairs or CMEs (Coronal Mass Ejections). These throw huge amounts of radiation into the solar system which in turn bombard the atmosphere with energy thus raising temps. We are currently in a down turn cycle of solar activity which will result in less radiation hitting the atmosphere, thus less heat from the sun.

I frankly am glad for the increased CO2 which will hold in the heat we have now. I moved south away from the snow, last thing I want is it to start snowing in Florida. :)

Offline Clifra Jones

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #39 on: February 28, 2008, 01:25:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Au contraire Lazs, I think it is pure arrogance to claim that the composition of the Earth's atmosphere has no effect on temperature, say alone that the earth's surface has no effect on the atmosphere.
That said, the arrogant humans have caused drastic changes on both in a very short leap of time.
BTW,remind me of Krakatau and some others....got some digging to do.
Cheers to the southern states (from snow)...


Most don't claim that is has "no" effect., but to claim that a little over 100 years of industrial activity has placed the Earth on the edge of a cataclismic GW event is just scare tactics.

One must question the GW advocates when the solutions to the problem they propose smack so of anti-capitalism, anti-industrialism, etc., etc.

We see this every day in Florida where, yes, we have a problem with our rivers and the Everglades, but the solutions proposed by the enviros is to slap punitive measures against farmers and industry. When methods that actually work, like runoff filtering levies are preposed they resist them to the point of lawsuits. Again, one must ask, "What is their real motivation here?"

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #40 on: February 28, 2008, 02:17:59 PM »
angus.. I did not say the atmosphere has no effect.. I said that a tiny little part of it has little effect..  co2 is a tiny little part of the atmosphere which is mostly water vapor which we have no effect on which we don't have any real understanding of which is affected by solar activity which we have very little understanding of.

lazs

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #41 on: February 28, 2008, 04:17:32 PM »
Of course when he says 'we' he means 'he'.

Offline Curval

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11572
      • http://n/a
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #42 on: February 28, 2008, 04:24:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
angus.. If the atmosphere weighs the same as a duck...it's made of wood...and therefore.....

lazs


There...that's better.

;)
Some will fall in love with life and drink it from a fountain that is pouring like an avalanche coming down the mountain

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #43 on: February 29, 2008, 02:50:29 AM »
So it also floats in the water, and you could build a bridge out of it :D

Anyway, Clifra Jones, the story of industrialization with much more effect on our environment than just silly CO2 is much longer than just 100 years.
100 years puts you to 1908 ....but the dawn of the humans going big is much farter away.
Biggest effect IMHO is probably change of surface rather than exhaust, as well as the surfaces effects on some exhaust or atmosphere construction might be much more than our exhausts.
Some of those things are too scary, - just the co2 is nothing that bad copmpared to it...it sometimes baffles me why people focus on that so narrowly.
THe effect seems to be enough though for our globe to actually warm, while getting less heat from the sun,- try to tell Lazs that one :D So, what would it do in an increased solar activity? Nice and crusty IMHO, for if the Icecaps are melting AND the sea is warming at the same time,while we have less solar heat,ut's not a small deal...
As for
"One must question the GW advocates when the solutions to the problem they propose smack so of anti-capitalism, anti-industrialism, etc., etc."

Well, look at it this way. With the way we are using up our resources, there is no chance at all that we can carry on for more than perhaps a 100 years. We're going to hit the wall unless we discover some magic wand.
I'll give you a small example below:

...To be continued....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
boroda.. your take..
« Reply #44 on: February 29, 2008, 02:51:51 AM »
It's a miniscule example...but reflects human behaviure on a scale small enough to understand it, so I hope you get the point....

SADDEST FATE FOR AN ISLAND NATION
The demise of Nauru

Most people have never heard of Nauru. The world’s smallest independent republic, Nauru is an eight-square-mile island that lies halfway between Hawai and New Zealand and has a population of around 12.000. One hundred years ago, Nauru was a sparkling emerald of dense tropical forests surrounded by blue water,much like the thousands of other islands scattered across Polynesia. Today 90 percent of Nauru resembles a moonscape, with only a thin strip of greenery around its perimeter. What happened? It was the Nauruans’ good and then very bad luck to be living on one of the only Islands in the south Pacific to be made almost entirely of high-grade phosphate, an important fertilizer ingredient – the result of migratory seabirds having used the atoll as a rest stop for eons.
When a German-British consortium found out about the phosphate in the early twentieth century, it moved in with steam shovels and started scooping away the island’s interior, compensating native landowners a half penny for each ton of phosphate they hauled away. By the time Nauru won its independence in 1968,and estimated two-thirds of its surface had been mined. With independence came a much better return on the phosphate – the islan’s only real exportable asset – so the mining continued unabated. Now that the money was good, why turn back? As the Economist repoted, “For a brief, heady oment in the 1970s, Nauruans were, astonishingly, among the richest people on earth.” They enjoyed tax-free lives filled with wonderful perks, and work was strictly optional.
Then two bad things happened: First, the Nauruans lost their fortune to con artists, who swindled them with bogus money-market schemes and, most notably, a crazy investment in a theatrical musical about the life of Leonardo da Vinci (Leonardo: A Portrait of Love) that lost millions of dollars. Second, Nauru essentially ran out of Nauru. The island had literally been hauled away, shipload by shipload. What little phosphate remains is too expensive to extract, so most foreigh mining companies have picked up their equipment and left. Today Nauru is on the verge of bankruptcy and limps along by selling passports, providing unreported banking services (to such clients as the Russian Mafia, which has laundered an estimated $70 billion there), and presenting itself as a miserable holding and detention camp for Australian-bound refugees.
In the fall of 2004, Nauru fount itself unable to continue financing its massive debt and was forced to relinquish the property portfolio it had acquired in the boom days and put it up as collateral, including several hotels in Sydney and Melbourne and a range of shopping centers. Nauru’s health minister announced that the government was “basically broke” while the island’s financial minister opined that the assylum seekersbeing held in Nauru’s Australian subsidized detention camp were more fortunate than the islan’s own residents. “The facilities they provide in those centers are better than we can provide for our own people”.
To make matters worse, Nauruans rank amongst the most obese people on the planet, thanks to their need to import preserved food (even fresh water has to be shipped in). Over 50 percent of the population has diabetes, and life expectancy is 20 years less than that of people living in nearby developed countries.
As if all of that weren’t enough, Nauru itself may one day cease to exist. Evidence suggests that ocean levels are rising and eventually the Nauruans may have to evacuate. Then, Nauru will be nothing but a bad memory.


From the book “The WORLD’S WORST, A GUIDE TO THE MOST DISGUSTING HIDEOUS Inept, and Dangerous People, Places,and THINGS ON EARTH” by Mark Frauenfelder. 0-8118-4606-7
Chronicle books LLC, http://www.chroniclebooks.com


Nice book BTW :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)