Monday, 30 September 2013

Logical Questions

Which bothers you more?  A government shut-down or a NCAA football season shut-down?

If you were in dire consequences, who would be more helpful to you.....your next-door neighbor or some Senator from a thousand miles away?

If you were awful bad sick and needed to stay on the couch all day....would you prefer to watch CNN the entire day, or sixteen episodes of Bonanza?

Who is a better salesman.....your local Ford dealer or your local Senator?

If Facebook disappeared tomorrow....would it really bother you?

Would you be more disturbed over a septic-tank failure or government-failure?

Is there any real difference between the cheap McDonalds coffee and Starbucks coffee?

If Amtrak ran a new line that came with ten miles of your house....would it influence you to suddenly start riding the train....even if you've never ridden the train in your entire life?

If you knew that thirty percent of the folks on a Greyhound bus had warrants out on them, or recently wrapped up drug rehab....would it deter you from riding the bus?

Is there any TV minister who really is legit, honest, and wholesome?

Can you remember any episode of Mr Ed (the talking horse) that really made sense or was worth watching?

Would it bother you if your Mennonite neighbor came up and wanted to secretly run an electrical line across your property to the back of his house and secretly get electricity?

Which would you prefer as a neighbor?  A meth guy, a Italian mafia guy, an Iranian bio-tomato farmer, or a lusty gal who mowed the lawn in a halter top that was two sizes too small?

If Cuban hospitals charged fees that were twenty percent of what the regular US hospitals were charging.....would you be willing to fly down and have stuff done?

If the entire staff of the Today Show were dumb as bricks....would that really deter you from watching them?

Does anything that happens in Syria really bother you?

95-Percent Sure, About Nothing

I'm not much into global warming, or global cooling.  I do believe in climate change (or what I like to refer to changes).  I'd readily admit that the weather changes all the time....for the past four hundred million years.  The warmer-guys hate my attitude.  They would counter that extremes occur today of a great nature, and I would counter that we've had bad hurricanes, droughts, blizzards, and massive rainfall....for four hundred million years.  There just isn't anything "new".

This past week, the UN has this special committee of sorts....which specialize in pumping climate change (they try not to use the words global warming or global cooling anymore) meet and issue a report.

Weeks ago....someone on the internal side of this committee finally got sick and tired of the chit-chat, and put out a significant debate email....showing massive issues with the data collected.

You long as you can show a warming trend....ever how small....then you could produce dozens of computer model simulations to show it's relationship to carbon build-up.  In the real world....carbon in the atmosphere is building.....with absolute facts on that.  No one can debate the carbon episode.  It inches up, and probably has been doing so for fifty-odd years.

Well....heating-up....basically stopped back in the mid 1990s.  Statistically, you can go and find enough world data to show a flat line from that point on.

This is a problem for this whole computer simulation thing.  Without that growth in can't go and play global warming, global cooling, or climate control.

So there's this theory.  Most folks would stand there for a brief minute and listen to it.  The environmental scientist will tell you that the ocean is out at work....absorbing heat, and maybe even storing it.  How?  Well....he can't really's a theory.

The curious thing.....with thousands of computers and thousands of scientist at work.....they can't produce a single computer model to show how this relationship would work, and how the oceans could absorb heat and act like a heat-absorption device.

The UN committee comes out this past week and then says that they are 95-percent certain that global 'something' is going on, and that it will shrink the ice mountains at the South Pole, and bring cities like New York City under several feet of water.  They have computer models that they've built that will show if you melt x-number of tons of ice....New York City no longer exists.

Sadly, this whole meeting and announcement....ends up being a comical episode.  If the temperatures had just continued on like they were in 1995....they'd have a great case to show the terrible future of the world.  Presently?  They've more or less hit a brick wall.  How can an idiot be 95-percent of something.....if he can't prove his case?  And that's how you end up with lack of public confidence.