The ‘Good Germans’ Among Us

 

B25395 / Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:10:58 / “War on Terror”

‘Bush lies’ doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.
~ Frank Rich

The following “editorial summary”:
~ GWHunta

The tactics used by the U.S. military against Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib were neither effective for the stated goal of obtaining actionable intelligence, nor were they legal by prevailing international or even domestic standards.

These tactics were however, quite effective in terms of the unstated goal of inspiring a true hatred for U.S. troops amongst the Iraqi populace and fueling the then fledgling insurgency within Iraq.

Many, if not most of these detainees were innocent of any wrongdoing and were simply swept up, confined and questioned in a random search for information regarding the locations of weapons caches or insurgent activities. As if this weren’t injustice enough, “trouble makers” were then further segregated, tortured and sexually humiliated.

There is simply no excuse for torture in any form, nor for continuing the support for a war of occupation and military aggression against a civilian population.

Sometimes no Peace

As a news headline/summary:

-40
~ the management

terrible bad average good great

RECENT COMMENTS

as I’ve said before, this space is for news headlines, not editorials. if you want to bring up for discussion, write a blog about it.

thanks, the management

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/15/07 14:59:55

People should just FN bugger off about the Germans — eSPEcially given how “good” the critical mass of little US citizens have been for the last 50 years. And. Foythamoah : ‘twas Nazi EUROPE, my friends — not just Nazi Germany — if you really want to stop shaming yourselves.

We don’t want to use the words “denigrate” or “philistines” either (unless we’re referring respectfully to Palestinians).

Silly rabbits.

microdot @ 10/15/07 15:21:16

It is true though, that the United States can start to see how Nazi Europe might have happened — by looking at ourselves more closely in the mirror.

microdot @ 10/15/07 15:26:31

Get this — about 250,000 holocaust survivors live in Israel and about a third of them do so BELOW the poverty line.

To help them out, knock me over with a feather, Ehud’s gonna give ‘em $20 bucks a month each, until he runs out of his $343 million USD grant (they’re thinking it’ll take 70 years — holocaust survivors).

What is it, exactly, that sounds so uber fishie about that?

microdot @ 10/15/07 16:05:17

NYT, quelle surprise!

microdot @ 10/15/07 16:06:42

I have a good German From Hell story though . . . momentito, I find it.

microdot @ 10/15/07 16:29:59

There are a few complications, quelle surprise, The Killer Countess (good “German” from Hell) in question was “Swiss”. In quotes. Courtesy of Les Anglais. Noone does quotes like Les Anglais. It’s a sure sign of Oxbridge In The House.

Al Jazeera loves ‘em. But. In this case, we’re talking about The Independent.

So but anyway, I’m not sure what came before the Hungarian nationality that preceded the Swiss one although it looks like there’s an Austrian one thrown in for good measure.

There’s more to this story than meets the eye, maybe I’ll spring it on the G, maybe I’ll be too busy.

Enjoy.

The killer countess: The dark past of Baron Heinrich Thyssen’s daughter

She was born into one of Europe’s most powerful dynasties. And involved in a wartime atrocity so shocking that it remains shrouded in secrecy to this day. David Litchfield investigates the dark past of Baron Heinrich Thyssen’s daughter Margit

Published: 07 October 2007 by The Independent.

microdot @ 10/15/07 18:31:34

OPEN QUOTE (from the Frank Rich find)

The gunmen who mowed down the two Christian women worked for a Dubai-based company managed by Australians, registered in Singapore and enlisted as a subcontractor by an American contractor headquartered in North Carolina.

END OF QUOTE

I didn’t know that. Good information. Very useful.

microdot @ 10/15/07 18:43:38

The good name is gone, dude, and there remains quite a bit more to lose.

microdot @ 10/15/07 18:48:22

Our souls.

GWHunta @ 10/15/07 19:30:50

It is true though, that the United States can start to see how Nazi Europe might have happened — by looking at ourselves more closely in the mirror.

On this I completely agree.

alexander @ 10/15/07 21:06:48

Democracies do not devolve into dictatorships on the orders of tyrants, but by the actions of the cowards that carry them out.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/15/07 22:58:15

Democracies do not devolve into dictatorships on the orders of tyrants, but by the actions of the cowards that carry them out.

Hate to point this out, but the act of taking a functional society and transforming it into a dictatorship isn’t ever done by the nicest of people, but it’s hardly something that can be done by cowards…

Truthcansuk @ 10/15/07 23:38:04

Define if you will cowards.

Those that will knowingly compromise the values and rights of others and misuse their own professional authority in the performance of their duties in order to fulfill the illegal and immoral demands placed upon them by the tyrants in power.

Tearing down the rule of law and the rights granted to each individual by both the rule of law and those recognized as inalienable human values is the ultimate act of cowardice. Equal justice is the bedrock of civilization.

When justice is for sale and unavailable to those lacking the resources to afford it, the moral genocide has begun and the physical genocide is soon to follow.

Your experience and understanding in these matters is seemingly thus far theoretical.

Mine is real.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/16/07 08:36:57

God, sometimes I wonder how I lived without reading this funny ass shit…

misanthropic @ 10/16/07 09:33:15

Enjoy your laugh.

I live a mile and a half from a maximum security prison where every cell has the built in capability to be used as an individual gas chamber, or a whole wing, or the cells in an entire unit, by design.

I watched it being built from the ground up, searched every nook and cranny before it opened and worked in it for the first seven years of its operation.

And along with other housing unit staff rehearsed the necessary procedures to isolate the airflow to and from individual cells multiple times as required by policy.

A lot of additional tax payer money was expended to include these features within the original design.

Read the U.S.A. Patriot Act and some of the subsequent legislation that has come down the pike since and then realize that this particular institution is one of many.

What does it take to be defined a “terrorist” in the event of a national emergency?

What are the potential penalties? Who would conduct the trials? And where?

In Michigan, Corrections Officers, who also write the misconducts, hear the minor misconduct cases and decide their outcomes. Other non-uniformed MDOC staff are dedicated for the hearing of major misconducts.

Rooms were designated for this purpose and designed into the facility, with plenty (as of 1997) unused space for expansion.

In the event of marshal law, the physical plants are already in place for the dispensation of “justice” to maintain the civil order with either civilian and or military courts, state police supplemented with national guard troops and state department of corrections staff and infrastructure.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/16/07 10:04:48

There is simply no excuse for torture in any form, nor for continuing the support for a war of occupation and military aggression against a civilian population.
~ GWHunta

GWHunta @ 10/16/07 10:10:44

There’s an old saying in the MDOC, “What comes round, goes round.”

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/16/07 10:10:58

The gas chamber prison scoop is quite ghastly thank you very much.

I’ve heard of The New Prisons being built in Turkey by US and European architects — F-Type prisons. I don’t know if they’re the same ones you’re talking about. Maybe you could have a look see. I posted a series of two essays on the subject here, as a matter of fact. Back in December 06.

Turkey Part 1 — Intro to Turkey’s F-type Prisons and their uses

This is the one that talks about attacking prison populations ( primarly comprised of political dissidents ( in Turkey you can get arrested for even mentioning the Armenian genocide)) with Gas.

Turkey Part 2 — Part 1 continued

microdot @ 10/16/07 12:26:14

You talk as though there once was a just civil society but I don’t think we have a record of one. Do we?

The United States, with our fancy constitution, was built from the ground up with slave labor and pirated commodities. Those people that Our Founding Fathers declared to all be equal were all white male landowners. That’s what they meant when they said Men. Propertied White Males.

We’re not reverting back to something beyond which we’ve already progressed. Whatever else we may be doing.

microdot @ 10/16/07 12:30:18

GWhunta – Your experience and understanding in these matters is seemingly thus far theoretical. Mine is real.

Aww… now the scientists on this site are probably going to quote this line back at you whenever you try and discuss Global Warming…

Doesn’t seem fair… Doesn’t seem right…

Truthcansuk @ 10/16/07 12:38:11

QUICK RECAP

Junta — Democracies do not devolve into dictatorships on the orders of tyrants, but by the actions of the cowards that carry them out.

Tcs – Hate to point this out, but the act of taking a functional a functional society and transforming it into a dictatorship isn’t ever done by the nicest of people, but it’s hardly something that can be done by cowards…

END OF QUOTES

Tyrants don’t typically “carry out” the dictatorships over which they preside. Perhaps what Junta is saying is that tyranny gets ahead because people fail to stand up to them.

They succeed because the people with guns stand to gain something. Like money. Lots of it. Nazi Europe, my friends, was an economic recovery program and so is the genocide in Iraq.

microdot @ 10/16/07 13:05:27

Truthcansuk,

No disrespect intended. But your world view changes when you’ve been repeatedly victimized by a system you risked life and limb to support.

As for my opinions regarding scientific theory, the “scientists” on this site are no more qualified climatologists or atmospheric scientists than am I. Unfortunately most fields of scientific inquiry have become so specialized that once outside their own myopic field of study, most scientist are no better at discerning the forest from the trees than is the typical layman.

Seems as though you choose to gloss right over the aspects of the internal security system within these United States and the possibility that the slide to the far right will almost certainly result in genocide.

Hard to call what is currently going on in Iraq anything but.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/16/07 18:01:46

Hunta – Truthcansuk, No disrespect intended.

None taken, GW. None intended on my part either.

Unfortunately most fields of scientific inquiry have become so specialized that once outside their own myopic field of study, most scientist are no better at discerning the forest from the trees than is the typical layman.

You could be right… I’ve met one of them in real life, and he seemed pretty sharp, though…

Seems as though you choose to gloss right over the aspects of the internal security system within these United States and the possibility that the slide to the far right will almost certainly result in genocide.

There’s always the possibility, although i wouldn’t qualify it as ‘almost certain…’

Hard to call what is currently going on in Iraq anything but.

I actually don’t consider what’s going on in Iraq as a genocide. But then, I disagree with the definition as set forth by the UN…

Truthcansuk @ 10/16/07 18:09:18

the ‘scientists’ on this site are no more qualified climatologists or atmospheric scientists than am I.

I heartily disagree. While I have not met any of the geeks myself, from a purely reading stand point one side is quite clear, eloquent and informational based, that’s the scientists, mate, sorry, and the other just follows typical spam 1,000 new articles a second protocol. In my experience the side that is spamming a zillion aritcles from questionable sources are doing so to bury the fine points made by the geeks.

I heart geeks.

misanthropic @ 10/17/07 09:28:05

I have been singularly responsible for trying to re-frame and broaden this debate and introduce some serious consideration the the aspects of anthropogenic climate impact that are being totally ignored by the mainstream.

Spamming news articles has clearly not been the basis of my efforts in that regard.

I’ve written several original blogs on the topic and posted scores of in depth explanations of non-CO2 centric anthropogenic climate changing impacts.

Originally I was met with a total lack of consideration and lumped into the rest of those whom have been labeled “climate change deniers.”

And once again the need to defend my views and spin away from the topic of this blog is pursued. You make the assumption my assertions are incorrect regarding anthropogenic impacts changing the climate, but none have made any effort to rebut or demonstrate any weakness in the theory I have put forth.

My position is as equally supported by the correlation of data as is the CO2 centric theory, but the physics of my theory can be clearly calculated and explained as well as providing a much better explanation of why the Arctic has been inordinately impacted by “global warming.”

Anyway, this blog and thread is about the current slide into fascism and the potential for totalitarianism, marshal law, dealing with “Peak Oil” and the probability of widespread genocide in order to maintain the viability of the global economy as evidenced by decades of preparations both within the domestic U.S. and by the post “cold war” global expansion of U.S. military capability to project power abroad.

Sometimes no Peace (dividend)

GWHunta @ 10/17/07 11:18:33

Just a few breaths of air containing high levels of hydrogen sulfide gas can cause death.

GWHunta @ 10/17/07 12:28:19

Your experience and understanding in these matters is seemingly thus far theoretical.

You just said that? You just said that. You just said that.

Snark @ 10/17/07 15:37:01

You make the assumption my assertions are incorrect regarding anthropogenic impacts changing the climate, but none have made any effort to rebut or demonstrate any weakness in the theory I have put forth.

Your theory is a hypothesis. You present with great arrogance as if it is a foregone conclusion, and as if it should be given equal weight to rigorous scientific research. That’s the source of the friction you encounter, not the content of your ideas.

My position is as equally supported by the correlation of data as is the CO2 centric theory

First off, how the fuck do you know? You haven’t read 90% of the papers published on global warming, and I know for a fact you haven’t read the IPCC report. And secondly, no, your data is not correlated to anything. You haven’t done the statistics to demonstrate significant correlation. In fact, you haven’t manipulated the data at all. You’ve presented a hypothesis, nothing more, and then demand that it be treated with the same consideration as a hypothesis that’s been supported by data and rigorous statistical analysis. And we don’t do that in science.

as well as providing a much better explanation of why the Arctic has been inordinately impacted by “global warming

It has not been inordinately impacted by global warming. It is inordinately sensitive to global warming. Your hypothesis clicks pretty well with your fundamental misconception about the nature of the effect of warming trends on arctic environments, but that’s about all. Global warming is actually affecting large continental masses in the northern hemisphere most, and the actual magnitude of increase in polar regions is substantially less. But even that lessened impact is crucial, because it’s a thermally sensitive system.

The arctic and alpine regions of the globe are inordinately sensitive to global warming because they’re the only regions on Earth whose climates fluctuate closely around the freezing point of water. A tiny increase in temperature can be the difference between 310 days below freezing and 350 – and in a system whose biological, hydrological, and geological processes are governed by time spent above freezing, that’s enormously significant.

And if you’re going to play the experience card, then I get to do the same – my research has been conducted entirely in alpine and glacial areas. I know how those systems work.

Snark @ 10/17/07 16:19:24

tcs said, “I actually don’t consider what’s going on in Iraq a genocide, but then I disagree with the definition as set forth by the UN . . .”

That’s interesting. There’s a lot to think about there. Genes aren’t what they used to be, of course. It turns out there aren’t as many as we thought there were, back when we coined the term. And most of what the little buggers end up expressing turns out to be a function of environmental factors. So, literally, if we were going to be really exact about it, the only genocide Nazi Europe can literally have been said to engage in is their extermination of the physically and mentally handicapped.

Intellectuals and Communists and people who speak a Semitic language don’t really qualify.

I’m not sure what we’ve decided about homosexuals. What’s the consensus on that? Anyone know? Is that considered congenital these days?

So but anyway…. we should probably find another term to label situations where wholesale slaughter of people — due to the circumstances of their birth — are concerned.

No time like the present, truth, what would you suggest?

microdot @ 10/17/07 16:59:00

Exactly, Snark, well done.

misanthropic @ 10/17/07 21:40:52

No time like the present, truth, what would you suggest?

I suggest we stick to a strict definition of Genocide in which intent is the key factor. You can’t accidentally genocide people. You gotta mean it. And you gotta be trying to get them all…

Truthcansuk @ 10/17/07 21:48:36

And you gotta be trying to get them all…

It is in this way that being a genocidaire is like being a Pokemon master.

I’ve got open mass graves. Let me show you them.

deadduck @ 10/17/07 22:12:36

I’ve got open mass graves. Let me show you them.

Oh god…

Snark @ 10/17/07 22:44:23

I suggest we stick to a strict definition of Genocide in which intent is the key factor. You can’t accidentally genocide people. You gotta mean it. And you gotta be trying to get them all

The industrial style of extermination and disposal one envisions from historical portrayals of Nazi death camps sets far to high a standard for genocide.

More subtle means over longer periods of time are equally effective.

The ultimate factors in defining genocide is identifying the motive and determining intent.

Fewer Iraqis, more oil.

Same pie, bigger pieces.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/17/07 22:55:44

Genocide is clearly defined, not murky at all. There are a plethora of terms, such as ethnic cleansing, mass murder, democide etc…that can cover many of the other joyous human practices.

misanthropic @ 10/17/07 23:02:36

Fewer Iraqis, more oil.

I find this sort of geopolitical arithmetic to be simplistic. It’s entirely possible to pillage a country’s oil wholesale without invading and occupying it. Nigeria and Burma come to mind. You don’t need fewer Iraqis to get more oil.

But you do need fewer Iraqis to maintain a weak client state that’s utterly dependent on you, maintain geopolitical dominance, run pipelines, pressure recalcitrant ‘rogue’ states, stake out a claim on the southwest side of Eurasia, and get some primo land for huge military bases. And also get more oil, but I think that particular objective has kind of been fucked and burned by now; in case you haven’t noticed, oil has been hovering around 80 bucks a barrel for weeks now.

Snark @ 10/17/07 23:06:55

I’ve noticed. But the higher the price goes, the greater the incentive and rewards of the pillaging.

I’ll grant you the “arithmetic” is simplistic. The fundamental difference between Iraqis and Nigerians is that Iraqis have become accustomed to the benefits of oil wealth and aren’t willing to sit back and be pillaged without resistance.

Iraq is now and will remain a cluster, primarily because the “job” isn’t finished until we’ve accomplished “regime change” in Iran as well.

GWHunta @ 10/17/07 23:21:03

Fucking Persians.

misanthropic @ 10/17/07 23:29:15

GWHunta, I think you should wait to say or post anything on global warming until you’ve done a bit of actual science on the subject, because I don’t think I have personally ever seen anyone so thoroughly owned before. From here on out I am going to refer to you as Kunta Kinte. Don’t worry, one day maybe you’ll teach kids to read, then you’ll be the head engineer of a starship in a utopic future, but for now Snark’s got the whip and you better go pick him some motherfucking cotton.

rapejesus @ 10/18/07 00:05:34

Dang. That post was sensitive.

Snark @ 10/18/07 07:26:59

That Misanthropic Cat – Genocide is clearly defined, not murky at all. There are a plethora of terms, such as ethnic cleansing, mass murder, democide etc…that can cover many of the other joyous human practices.

Exactly. Words have different meanings for a reason…

Truthcansuk @ 10/18/07 09:16:26

Dang. That post was sensitive.

And as myopic as most of the criticism and response I receive here.

I’d have liked to leave this particular thread directed more to the intent of U.S. domestic and foreign policies over the course of the past thirty years.

The naive seem to believe that our bureaucracy has for the past several decades simply ignored the fact that population demands would outstrip oil production (energy availability) in the foreseeable future and that there hasn’t been a comprehensive plan to deal with this coming reality.

Since we seem to be focused on what you view as my shortcomings regarding my non CO2 centric explanation, allow me if you will to point out where Snark and his cheerleaders fail to separate the wheat from the chaff.

My position is as equally supported by the correlation of data as is the CO2 centric theory, but the physics of my theory can be clearly calculated and explained as well as providing a much better explanation of why the Arctic has been inordinately impacted by “global warming.”
~ GWHunta

To which Snark repsponded with:

It (the Arctic) has not been inordinately impacted by global warming. It is inordinately sensitive to global warming. Your hypothesis clicks pretty well with your fundamental misconception about the nature of the effect of warming trends on arctic environments, but that’s about all.

Global warming is actually affecting large continental masses in the northern hemisphere most, and the actual magnitude of increase in polar regions is substantially less. But even that lessened impact is crucial, because it’s a thermally sensitive system.

The arctic and alpine regions of the globe are inordinately sensitive to global warming because they’re the only regions on Earth whose climates fluctuate closely around the freezing point of water. A tiny increase in temperature can be the difference between 310 days below freezing and 350 – and in a system whose biological, hydrological, and geological processes are governed by time spent above freezing, that’s enormously significant.

Now in the view of Snark and his cheerleaders, I’ve been put in my place.

Wrong.

What you all fail to understand is that in terms of energy transfer and climate change this is not simply a case of: “A tiny increase in temperature can be the difference between 310 days below freezing and 350 – and in a system whose biological, hydrological, and geological processes are governed by time spent above freezing, that’s enormously significant.”

Ice doesn’t simply go from a solid to liquid form with a simple rise in temperature.

Nor does water vapor precipitate from the sky with the drop of a degree or two.

Review your high school physics. Latent v sensible heat.

334 joules/gram to melt ice, with no rise in temperature.

2272 joules/gram to boil or evaporate liquid water to water vapor.

When water vapor carried to the Arctic precipitates from the relatively thin northern troposphere or condenses directly on the snow or ice covered surface this water vapor carries with it huge amounts of latent energy, sufficient to melt 7 times its own mass of solid ice.

It is not simply the change of a few degrees upward in sensible heat, it is a matter of an inordinate and unprecedented amount of energy transfer from primarily the northern mid latitudes to the Arctic.

This can only be the result of the increased availability of water vapor in the atmosphere due to increased agriculture and particularly the exponential increases in agricultural irrigation, not simply increased atmospheric CO2 or any of the other trace gases.

Now consider what I’ve said for a moment to be correct, whether you comprehend the basic physics and the concepts involved or not.

Let’s say overcoming the “Peak Oil” energy problem, with increased utilization of say next generation safer nuclear power could meet demand.

You’ve still got a global population of more than 6,500,000,000 and growing to feed and if the core problem is truly increased water vapor due to agricultural production and the irrigation of crops to feed these burgeoning masses, maybe the root problem really isn’t the CO2 from the smokestacks and tailpipes, but the CO2 you’ll exhale with your next breath.

Due primarily to the huge transfer of solar energy, the water required and resultant water vapor produced that it took to grow and provide you with the food for the fuel to produce it.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 10:31:54

Global warming and climate change is about an increase in the sequestration, movement and re-release of incoming solar energy.

If you truly wish to understand global warming and climate change, look first to the
enthalpy of transformation of this most plentiful compound, covering more than 75% of this planet’s surface and is by far the most abundantly available GHG in our troposphere.

CO2 centric global warming theory is simply “trace gas hysteria.”

Just because it is the hypothesis that you can get your mind around and most fully understand, doesn’t make it so.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 10:46:25

If you truly want to understand why it is getting warmer, maybe you should set aside the opinions of biologists and focus on the physics.

To paraphrase Mr. Rich with whose quote I began this blog:

‘Gore lies’ doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 10:54:02

“And as myopic as most of the criticism and response I receive here.”

Dude, post your shit elsewhere, even multiple places, then gives us a link so we can see that it doesn’t matter where you’re at (unless you’re talking about fucktard planet or some rightwing shithole like stormfront: they may appreciate your attempted disinformation more).

rapejesus @ 10/18/07 11:07:21

If you truly want to understand why it is getting warmer, maybe you should set aside the opinions of biologists and focus on the physics.

It seems that you’re speaking mostly from a theoretical basis, there, champ. Or are ex-yard dogs qualified to hold absolutely authoritative opinions on atmospheric physics, while graphic designers are dismissed if they express opinions about totalitarianism? And alpine ecologists who perform their research on soil mediation of biogeochemical cycling, whose collaborators at the Institute for Arctic and Alpine Research include hydrologists, glaciologists, and biogeochemists, and who spend no fewer than twenty hours a week poring over the latest published research on global change and ecology should be dismissed likewise? Just checking. This is fascinating.

334 joules/gram to melt ice, with no rise in temperature.

I’m not impressed by the application of high-school physics to the behavior of immensely complex global systems. What you’re describing is a chunk of ice melting on a tabletop – not the product of complex interactions of biological, chemical, and atmospheric phenomena on a global scale. If you think you understand global warming on the basis of what you learned in high school, and perhaps college, physics (if your formal education on the topic made it that far), you’re dead wrong. It’d be like trying to forecast a car’s handling using nothing but Newton’s three laws and a calculator…and ignoring friction, Cd, road surface, suspension setup, and center of gravity.

Out of curiosity, do you believe that your endeavors on the subject are substantially equivalent to the work performed by researchers in the field? Do you believe that you could present what you’ve done to an objective evaluator and have it be considered equivalent and equally compelling and complete? Do you believe that your research on the matter is of similar caliber and rigor to that demanded for publication?

Ice doesn’t simply go from a solid to liquid form with a simple rise in temperature.

But it does do so over a substantially extended warm season – as demonstrated by reliable trends in data, not ludicrously oversimplified applications of poorly-understood high school physics.

Snark @ 10/18/07 11:20:21

“Further advice as to a proper summary?”

Summarize succinctly?

rapejesus @ 10/18/07 11:23:47

Again, bravo, Snark.

misanthropic @ 10/18/07 17:56:06

But it does do so over a substantially extended warm season – as demonstrated by reliable trends in data, not ludicrously oversimplified applications of poorly-understood high school physics.

Coming from a man who seven months ago couldn’t explain how a swamp cooler works and argued in favor of the ICE effect.

Re-read that article Snark and tell me who’s got it right, the scientists or the ex yard-dog.

More Arctic ice is disappearing in Snark’s aforementioned extended Arctic “warm season” in no small part because less is being formed during the Arctic winter.

I’m not particularly impressed by intuitive logic that ignores the basic physics, nor am I simply speaking about a block of ice on a tabletop.

I’m illustrating the tremendous transfer of solar energy northward from its point of original interaction with the biosphere and the mechanisms that redistribute it in a geographic area formerly devoid of this volume of heat energy.

This goes far beyond the additional green house blanket effect of a hundred parts per million of atmospheric CO2.

This documented increase in atmospheric CO2 simply can’t accomplish this.

Increased atmospheric water vapor can and does.

Deal with that or not.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 19:08:03

I reiterate my earlier question: Out of curiosity, do you believe that your endeavors on the subject are substantially equivalent to the work performed by researchers in the field?

Snark @ 10/18/07 19:16:05

Of course, y’all are a bunch of ivory tower overpaid hacks.

misanthropic @ 10/18/07 19:19:26

If it were simply a fossil fuel/atmospheric CO2/energy problem at the core of this “climate crisis,” nuclear power has the potential to at least temporarily mitigate that.

The truth is there is simply no currently economical way to produce sufficient food to feed 7 billion omnivorous humans and not impact the global climate.

Acknowledging that fact isn’t going to win elections.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 19:34:53

And look at that man dodge!

misanthropic @ 10/18/07 19:39:29

Out of curiosity, do you believe that your endeavors on the subject are substantially equivalent to the work performed by researchers in the field?

No, I don’t. I’m totally unfunded and educate and observe as a hobby not a paid or competitive endeavor, which means no bias nor dependence on outcome.

“Global warming” and climate change related fields of scientific endeavor have become a multi-billion dollar global industry.

Acknowledging the simplicity of ever expanding intensive agricultural area and surface water redirection as the primary anthropogenic climate influence has the potential to redirect a lot of funding.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 19:47:13

No, I don’t. I’m totally unfunded and educate and observe as a hobby not a paid or competitive endeavor, which means no bias nor dependence on outcome.

Dude, you don’t really think that getting paid for something automatically biases the outcome? Researchers like Snark and I get paid below the poverty line for 80 hour weeks. We don’t do this for money – and despite our differences in opinion sometimes, it sucks that you think that little of us.

tango @ 10/18/07 19:51:09

I still love you.

misanthropic @ 10/18/07 19:52:53

Heh… I guess I shouldn’t really care, but just to make it clear, most researchers do what they do for knowledge for knowledge’s sake. We don’t benefit one way or the other for empirically observing anthropogenic alterations to world climate. I’m not saying we’re selfless, or doing it for the good of humanity – because it truth the result is that we eventually get to make enough to support a family while getting to work a job that we love. I think it’s disgraceful that researchers and educators get such a shitty rap here.

The pockets of those who want to obscure the fact that climate change is happening are a hell of a lot deeper than those of the fledgling excuses for grants that researchers are stuck with in Bush’s America or Harper’s Canada. Fame and fortune (well, for scientists) await those who can show that climate change is not caused by humans – but it hasn’t because the data just don’t stack up that way.

tango @ 10/18/07 19:59:44

I say bravo. It’s like me, you think I’m teaching preschool for the big bucks? Fuck no, I’m doing it because I’ve found all the adults around to be little more than overstimulated fucktards. It’s my way of changing the world, one child at a time.

Scary, eh?

misanthropic @ 10/18/07 20:04:39

Tango as far as I know neither you nor Snark are focused exclusively on climate related research and I wasn’t implying or attributing a self interested bias to either of you, but Gore said this himself in An Inconvenient Truth and was applauded by the “scientific consensus.”

If you read these many threads carefully and objectively, you’ll find it isn’t me on the actively demeaning end of the stick, so don’t infer my meaning to be an implication of a bias where it isn’t.

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 20:04:39

The pockets of those who want to obscure the fact that climate change is happening are a hell of a lot deeper than those of the fledgling excuses for grants that researchers are stuck with in Bush’s America or Harper’s Canada. Fame and fortune (well, for scientists) await those who can show that climate change is not caused by humans – but it hasn’t because the data just don’t stack up that way.

Word

And let’s not even try to re-frame me or lump me in again as a “denier” because I recognize this problem as far too extreme to be simply the result of the previously acknowledged and considered anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2.

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 20:11:46

The truth of this entire matter begs the question?

How many people can be supported on this planet in a sustainable fashion?

GWHunta @ 10/18/07 20:16:41

If you read these many threads carefully and objectively, you’ll find it isn’t me on the actively demeaning end of the stick, so don’t infer my meaning to be an implication of a bias where it isn’t.

I was simply responding to this: “No, I don’t. I’m totally unfunded and educate and observe as a hobby not a paid or competitive endeavor, which means no bias nor dependence on outcome.”

Tango as far as I know neither you nor Snark are focused exclusively on climate related research

No, I’m working on an interdisciplinary study with climatologists, meteorologists, agronomists, microbial ecologists, soil scientists, ect. You implied earlier that researchers were myopic in their study, when the reality is that we’ve gone more interdisciplinary than ever before – it’s the only way to get grants, at least here in Canada. Plus, it’s awesome – Environ. Microbial Biotech. guys like me are expected to be completely up on climate change, and climate researchers are expected to be able to coherently talk about soil microbial processes. Plus, the cognitive tools that we develop go beyond any particular area of study.

Anyways, I agree with you here:

“The truth is there is simply no currently economical way to produce sufficient food to feed 7 billion omnivorous humans and not impact the global climate.”

and will leave it there for tonight.

tango @ 10/18/07 20:16:50

What do you believe to be the human carrying capacity of a sustainable planet?

Peace,

GWHunta @ 10/19/07 10:46:57

Addendum to the ‘End of Civilization’

If you believe you’ll survive whatever comes by accepting a more primitive and earth friendly lifestyle, look around.

There was an entire race of people that excelled at that lifestyle for a millennia.

Their descendants are now operating casinos.

Sometimes no Peace

GWHunta @ 10/19/07 23:35:18

After several seasons of social psychological preparation, whom might you vote off, or would happily vote you off the planet?

Ever wonder?

GWHunta @ 10/20/07 09:10:29
GWHunta @ 10/21/07 08:51:51
GWHunta @ 11/14/07 10:00:31

It is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.
~Theodore Roosevelt

GWHunta @ 04/16/08 09:32:44

Once again:

“Democracies do not devolve into dictatorships on the orders of tyrants, but by the actions of the cowards that carry them out.”

GW’s 09/24/08 address to the nation can be summarized as a message to the vested American worker that his 401 K plan depends upon the success of the Federal government in nationalizing the excesses of Wall Street and extorting “popular support” for whatever cuts in “social welfare” programs will be deemed necessary to fund what is fast becoming a series of corporate “bailouts.”

The core problem is a global economy based on the availability of reasonably priced crude oil as production is peaking.

Cutting the poor to save the wealthy is “The Plan” and is commonly referred to as “Demand Destruction.”

The “American way of life” aka CAPITALISM is after all, not negotiable.

Sometimes no Piece

No Peace,
Hunta

GWHunta @ 09/26/08 02:09:36

It’s on.

GWHunta @ 12/29/08 19:33:19

“Scary, eh?”

You said a mouthful and for once I’m in full agreement when you said “Scary, eh?”.

Chameleon @ 12/29/08 19:52:37
Advertisements

3 Responses to The ‘Good Germans’ Among Us

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s