From jrd1415 at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 01:15:15 2009 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:15:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] mysterious observations infer yo mama In-Reply-To: References: <000301ca11ef$55c573e0$cb094797@archimede> <000401ca1215$da9fcf40$64e91e97@archimede> <20090731215526535.EFCI24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 3:43 PM, BillK wrote: > Don't surrender that easily, Jeff. ?;) Thanks for the support. Not to go all Yoda on you, but the wisdom and utility of surrender is often under-appreciated, obscured by testosterone. Similarly, sometimes you have to lose, to win. I learned this playing cards with my wife Gail. She's not fiercely competitive -- likes to play more than win -- but it makes her happy to win all the same. And when she's happy, good things happen for me. I've been known to (secretly) throw a game now and again. Enlightened self-interest. A big picture kind of thing. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything you see I owe to spaghetti." Sophia Loren From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Aug 1 03:29:26 2009 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:29:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Regarding Healthcare from the CIA's data pages... Message-ID: <9531A2E9C828411FA851D2E8A7ADDC89@patrick4ezsk6z> This is from the Central Intelligence Agency's data pages..... JULY 30, 2009 4:14PM Weekly 10: Top 10 Countries For Life Expectancy At Birth a.. With all the recent talk about healthcare in the news, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at what countries have the longest life expectancy. The CIA World Factbook rates all countries with the following disclaimer: "this entry contains the average number of years to be lived by a group of people born in the same year, if mortality at each age remains constant in the future. The entry includes total population as well as the male and female components. Life expectancy at birth is also a measure of overall quality of life in a country and summarizes the mortality at all ages. It can also be thought of as indicating the potential return on investment in human capital and is necessary for the calculation of various actuarial measures." The age estimates on this list are for people born in 2009. Age estimates and country information come directly from the CIA factbook. For more information on worldwide life expectancy, or CIA publications, please visit their website at www.cia.gov. The United States a.k.a. The country with the "best healthcare in the world," as many healthcare non-reformers call it, placed 50th on the list. As a country that is supposed to have the "best healthcare in the world" - why are our citizens not living as long as the other 49 countries ahead of it? 1. Macau (People's Republic of China) - 84.36 years: Colonized by the Portuguese in the 16th century, Macau was the first European settlement in the Far East. Pursuant to an agreement signed by China and Portugal on 13 April 1987, Macau became the Macau Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People's Republic of China on 20 December 1999. In this agreement, China promised that, under its "one country, two systems" formula, China's socialist economic system would not be practiced in Macau, and that Macau would enjoy a high degree of autonomy in all matters except foreign and defense affairs for the next 50 years. 2. Andorra - 82.51 years: For 715 years, from 1278 to 1993, Andorrans lived under a unique co-principality, ruled by French and Spanish leaders (from 1607 onward, the French chief of state and the Spanish bishop of Urgel). In 1993, this feudal system was modified with the titular heads of state retained, but the government transformed into a parliamentary democracy. Long isolated and impoverished, mountainous Andorra achieved considerable prosperity since World War II through its tourist industry. Many immigrants (legal and illegal) are attracted to the thriving economy with its lack of income taxes. 3. Japan - 82.12 years: Japan attacked US forces in 1941 - triggering America's entry into World War II - and soon occupied much of East and Southeast Asia. After its defeat in World War II, Japan recovered to become an economic power and a staunch ally of the US. While the emperor retains his throne as a symbol of national unity, elected politicians - with heavy input from bureaucrats and business executives - wield actual decisionmaking power. The economy experienced a major slowdown starting in the 1990s following three decades of unprecedented growth, but Japan still remains a major economic power, both in Asia and globally. In January 2009, Japan assumed a nonpermanent seat on the UN Security Council for the 2009-10 term. 4. Singapore - 81.98 years: Singapore was founded as a British trading colony in 1819. It joined the Malaysian Federation in 1963 but separated two years later and became independent. Singapore subsequently became one of the world's most prosperous countries with strong international trading links (its port is one of the world's busiest in terms of tonnage handled) and with per capita GDP equal to that of the leading nations of Western Europe. 5. San Marino - 81.97 years: The third smallest state in Europe (after the Holy See and Monaco), San Marino also claims to be the world's oldest republic. According to tradition, it was founded by a Christian stonemason named Marinus in A.D. 301. San Marino's foreign policy is aligned with that of Italy; social and political trends in the republic also track closely with those of its larger neighbor. 6. Hong Kong (People's Republic of China) - 81.86 years: Occupied by the UK in 1841, Hong Kong was formally ceded by China the following year; various adjacent lands were added later in the 19th century. Pursuant to an agreement signed by China and the UK on 19 December 1984, Hong Kong became the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People's Republic of China on 1 July 1997. In this agreement, China promised that, under its "one country, two systems" formula, China's socialist economic system would not be imposed on Hong Kong and that Hong Kong would enjoy a high degree of autonomy in all matters except foreign and defense affairs for the next 50 years. 7. Australia - 81.63 years: Aboriginal settlers arrived on the continent from Southeast Asia about 40,000 years before the first Europeans began exploration in the 17th century. No formal territorial claims were made until 1770, when Capt. James COOK took possession in the name of Great Britain. Six colonies were created in the late 18th and 19th centuries; they federated and became the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901. The new country took advantage of its natural resources to rapidly develop agricultural and manufacturing industries and to make a major contribution to the British effort in World Wars I and II. In recent decades, Australia has transformed itself into an internationally competitive, advanced market economy. It boasted one of the OECD's fastest growing economies during the 1990s, a performance due in large part to economic reforms adopted in the 1980s. Long-term concerns include climate-change issues such as the depletion of the ozone layer and more frequent droughts, and management and conservation of coastal areas, especially the Great Barrier Reef. 8. Canada - 81.23 years: A land of vast distances and rich natural resources, Canada became a self-governing dominion in 1867 while retaining ties to the British crown. Economically and technologically the nation has developed in parallel with the US, its neighbor to the south across an unfortified border. Canada faces the political challenges of meeting public demands for quality improvements in health care and education services, as well as responding to separatist concerns in predominantly francophone Quebec. Canada also aims to develop its diverse energy resources while maintaining its commitment to the environment. 9. France - 80.98 years: Although ultimately a victor in World Wars I and II, France suffered extensive losses in its empire, wealth, manpower, and rank as a dominant nation-state. Nevertheless, France today is one of the most modern countries in the world and is a leader among European nations. Since 1958, it has constructed a hybrid presidential-parliamentary governing system resistant to the instabilities experienced in earlier more purely parliamentary administrations. In recent years, its reconciliation and cooperation with Germany have proved central to the economic integration of Europe, including the introduction of a common exchange currency, the euro, in January 1999. At present, France is at the forefront of efforts to develop the EU's military capabilities to supplement progress toward an EU foreign policy. 10: Sweden - 80.86 years: A military power during the 17th century, Sweden has not participated in any war in almost two centuries. An armed neutrality was preserved in both World Wars. Sweden's long-successful economic formula of a capitalist system interlarded with substantial welfare elements was challenged in the 1990s by high unemployment and in 2000-02 by the global economic downturn, but fiscal discipline over the past several years has allowed the country to weather economic vagaries. Sweden joined the EU in 1995, but the public rejected the introduction of the euro in a 2003 referendum. -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Aug 1 03:59:03 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:59:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Regarding Healthcare from the CIA's data pages... In-Reply-To: <9531A2E9C828411FA851D2E8A7ADDC89@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <9531A2E9C828411FA851D2E8A7ADDC89@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: <20090801035847969.LJDN24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> At 08:29 PM 7/31/2009 -0700, Olga quoth: >1. Macau (People's Republic of China) - 84.36 years: Can the demographers of China be trusted? Maybe they can, just saying. Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12950 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 04:12:18 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 14:12:18 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Regarding Healthcare from the CIA's data pages... In-Reply-To: <9531A2E9C828411FA851D2E8A7ADDC89@patrick4ezsk6z> References: <9531A2E9C828411FA851D2E8A7ADDC89@patrick4ezsk6z> Message-ID: 2009/8/1 Olga Bourlin : > This is from the Central Intelligence Agency's data pages..... > JULY 30, 2009 4:14PM > > Weekly 10: Top 10 Countries For Life Expectancy At Birth It's interesting that five of these top ten are physically tiny countries with very high population densities, while two are the opposite, huge countries with very low population densities. -- Stathis Papaioannou From max at maxmore.com Sat Aug 1 04:12:14 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:12:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria Message-ID: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> I'm preparing to leave for the weekend, so have only a little time to devote to this comment. James Hughes posted the results of one particular survey that reported apparently strong agreement on something or other. James especially highlights the figure of 97% agreement. That does indeed sound very impressive. In contrast to Adrian (if I understand his posts correctly), I do think that such a tight consensus among a group of scientists would be something to give considerable epistemic weight to -- at least in the absence of major objections, say from a neighboring discipline. But let's look at little more closely at it. >Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared >to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant >factor in changing mean global temperatures? > >About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question >and 82 percent the second. These numbers are lower than the most impressive one of 97%, but still high. >The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from >climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent >agreeing humans play a role. Agreement was lower in certain groups: >Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest >doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, >believing in human involvement. Why would agreement be higher among the climatologists than among other scientists, including meteorologists and physicists? One plausible answer is that it's because the climatologists can make better judgments. (Although evidence-based forecasting shows that expert forecasts of future changes cannot be trusted with this kind of problem.) Another plausible answer is that groupthink is at work, as it is in so many areas of human activity. This is hardly an arbitrary suggestion, given all the accusations of "denial" and "planetary traitors" and the strong pressures being exerted against skeptics. Of course there are other surveys, which produce different results. Climatologists are only one group qualified to answer these questions. But l'll set that aside here. One question that comes to mind is; How were the people to be questioned selected? What percentage of the total does the 3,100 or so represent? From what I've seen, some 10,200 earth scientists were contacted. Only 3,100 replied. Now, these *may* be representative, or they may not be. Anyone with an academic background in the social sciences, or statistics knows that samples can and often do misrepresent the whole. Given the thousands of signed dissenting opinions, I'm not terribly confident that the percentages of respondents in this survey accurately represent the whole group. It seems, for instance, that earth scientists working in private industry were ignored. Given that government-funded scientists may have an incentive (above and beyond the obviously heavy peer-pressure) to agree, the results may not give an accurate picture of all relevant scientists. These questions come to mind especially because of the highly politicized nature of this discussion. Also, specifically, because of misrepresentations such as seen with the IPCC report, where a small group of people claim to speak for a much larger group. (Compare the summary of the IPCC report to the actual details of the report...) Other surveys have yielded different percentages. You can see that just from the Wikipedia article cited by James: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change But, set aside these concerns. Much more troubling are the questions and the conclusions so quickly drawn from them. Consider the questions. What exactly were those surveyed being asked? 1. "Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels?" 1800 was around the tie that we began to recover more quickly from the Little Ice Age. So what does this tell us? Not much about today or about human activity. It does show that climate scientists agree that the global temperature changes over time. Who is going to disagree with *that*? 2. Has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures? So, 82% said yes to this. Is this anything to get excited about? Should it impress those of us who are a bit skeptical about warming catastrophe stories? Suppose you are entirely certain that carbon dioxide released by humans is not the cause of global warming. You would still easily grant that global mean temperatures has risen due to the urban heat island effect. In addition, the question is very vague, certainly if "significant" is taken in the sense of statistical significance (as it presumably is by these scientists). If those climate scientists believed that only 2% or 5% of observed warming could be attributed to human activity, they would still agree with that statement. How many would still agree if the question was: -- Do you agree that warming was almost certainly primarily due to human activity? (Not just "significant".) -- Is global warming principally or quantifiably due to human activity? -- Are you certain or almost certain that human activity would cause a degree of future warming that constituted a catastrophe? -- Do you believe that large cuts in carbon dioxide would be effective or cost-effective? -- Do you believe that the Kyoto Protocol is a sensible solution? Claiming consensus -- even if entirely justified -- on such vague questions that few skeptics would disagree with is an easy victory that gets us nowhere with any discussion that matters. Once again, dumbing down the issue to a "consensus" of some vague kind isn't useful. Aside from the foregoing points, I have to say that given the inaccuracy of climate models (as shown comparing them to the past), being impressed by a supposed (or even real) consensus of climate scientists doesn't look too different from relying on a consensus of astronomers. (I would have equally harsh things to say about economists, when they model whole economies...) Granted, that's overstating it. But not by a whole hell of a lot. Again, see my previous post pointing to an audit of the forecasting methodology of the IPCC report, which is considered the gold standard. I just can't see climate modeling as having attained the status of a hard science at this stage. Even if there was a rock solid consensus on some point of interest (rather than on statements that I have no problem with at all), I would not feel rationally compelled to assent to it as I would, for instance, in the case of a consensus among particle physicists who tell me not to worry about strangelets as they start up the Large Hadron Collider. Max P.S. Can a backer of the "consensus" view please point me to a good explanation of the fact that human emissions of greenhouse gases has continued unabated, and yet there has been zero global warming over the last 10 to 11 years? I would appreciate it. (By a "good explanation", I mean one that doesn't have to resort to something like Ptolemeic epicycles.) ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Aug 1 04:59:32 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:59:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <20090801045917128.ZKPO18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> At 11:12 PM 7/31/2009 -0500, Max wrote: >I have to say that given the inaccuracy of climate models (as shown >comparing them to the past), being impressed by a supposed (or even >real) consensus of climate scientists doesn't look too different >from relying on a consensus of astronomers. What's wrong with relying on a consensus of astronomers (in their appropriate domain)? Or did you mean sarcastically to write "astrologers"? Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12950 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From max at maxmore.com Sat Aug 1 05:25:57 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:25:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Correction: Astrologers, not astronomers Message-ID: <200908010526.n715Qcqk009079@andromeda.ziaspace.com> >I have to say that given the inaccuracy of climate models (as shown >comparing them to the past), being impressed by a supposed (or even >real) consensus of climate scientists doesn't look too different >from relying on a consensus of astronomers. I meant astrologers, not astronomers (of course). My deepest apologies to any astronomers reading. You are *real* scientists. (Thank you, Damien, for pointing out my typo.) Max From spike66 at att.net Sat Aug 1 05:42:51 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:42:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <98D3031BB5EE4805AE1457EDBBE003E0@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Max More > ... > I just can't see climate modeling as having attained the > status of a hard science at this stage... Max ... Max, there is a lot of really interesting science going on having to do with the fact that solar cycle 24 is wacky low: there are waaay fewer sunspots than there should be at this point, leading some to conjecture that we could be starting a new Dalton minimum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalton_Minimum This would be a bad thing indeed, however it is probably too early to really get worried. Last time it happened, early 1800s, there was a mini ice age. I track this as part of my job. I recently stopped using the NASA 50 percentile forecast and started using the 5 percentile forecast for the 10.7 cm radiation rise in cycle 24. The 5 percentile forecast is still too high for the number of sunspots and F10.7 we are seeing currently. I fear there is as much as a 10% chance we could suffer a mini ice age in the next 30 years. If so, I doubt that carbon dioxide emissions will do much to spare our species a great deal of suffering. spike From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 09:15:18 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 18:45:18 +0930 Subject: [ExI] mysterious observations infer yo mama In-Reply-To: References: <000301ca11ef$55c573e0$cb094797@archimede> <000401ca1215$da9fcf40$64e91e97@archimede> <20090731215526535.EFCI24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908010215j70cb466dm5ada470df94c886f@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/1 Jeff Davis : > Not to go all Yoda on you, but the wisdom and utility of surrender is > often under-appreciated, obscured by testosterone. ?Similarly, > sometimes you have to lose, to win. ?I learned this playing cards with > my wife Gail. ?She's not fiercely competitive -- likes to play more > than win -- but it makes her happy to win all the same. ?And when > she's happy, good things happen for me. ?I've been known to (secretly) > throw a game now and again. ?Enlightened self-interest. ? A big > picture kind of thing. And here's me awed by her meta-game. Mental note: never play cards with Gail! -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From msd001 at gmail.com Sat Aug 1 16:29:26 2009 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 12:29:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <98D3031BB5EE4805AE1457EDBBE003E0@spike> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <98D3031BB5EE4805AE1457EDBBE003E0@spike> Message-ID: <62c14240908010929r5a44d629rdb2b17a955583daa@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:42 AM, spike wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalton_Minimum the graph on that page strikes me as a very obvious fractal pattern with the Dalton Minimum bearing a resemblance to the slight dip in the modern maximum. The curve between the maximums on either side of these minima also looks similar to the curve between the Dalton Minimum and modern maximum regions of the graph. Either 400 years is not enough data to make further observation or it is too much that it obscures the detail. Interesting. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 02:34:18 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 19:34:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Aubrey de Grey poses for Playboy magazine? Message-ID: <2d6187670908011934s39210848u8c757f015b366c21@mail.gmail.com> I scanned over an article headline and thought for a moment it read, "Aubrey de Grey poses for Playboy." I was almost not surprised... http://www.spike.com/blog/aubrey-oday-poses/73919 John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benboc at lineone.net Sun Aug 2 10:18:50 2009 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 11:18:50 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Download 2 Million eBooks for no charge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A75680A.3080902@lineone.net> BillK clarified: > > Let me get this straight. They are offering, for a month, free access to a > > bunch of books which are already freely available. > > > > Have I got that wrong? > > >Sorry for the delay in replying. >(I was called away for an urgent meeting of the Illuminati. Things are >getting a bit dicey in some areas). > >As I understand it, some ebooks are normally free and some aren't. >Some need an annual membership fee. > >The main benefit of this free book fair seems to be a search engine >including all the organisations that agreed to join in. So it should >be easier to find a particular book. They also provide a comprehensive >list of ebook collections that people may wish to access (even when >there is a fee payable). Ah, thanks. That makes sense then. It just gets my hackles up when I see someone trying to take advantage of other people's generosity, or trying to pull the wool over people's eyes (such as at a a computer fair I went to recently, where there was a whole table full of 'bargain' CDs of wonderful software, for only ?5!!! -- the software was things like Open Office, The Gimp, Linux, ... I didn't see a single thing that wasn't available free on the web). I thought this might be an attempt to take advantage of people who are ignorant of things like the Gutenberg Project. Ben Zaiboc From benboc at lineone.net Sun Aug 2 10:18:59 2009 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 11:18:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] File sharers leak government secrets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A756813.2030305@lineone.net> John Grigg shared: >I was amazed to read this story of government secrets being made vulnerable >due to file sharing. > >http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-326045.html ======================= "I'm planning to introduce a bill," said Rep. Edolphus Towns, a New York Democrat who heads a House oversight committee. He said his legislation would limit the use of peer-to-peer software on all computer networks operated by the federal government or its contractors. ======================= Ha. Legislate, don't Educate! Anything to avoid actually teaching people how to use their computers. And some people still think a world goverment is a good idea. Ben Zaiboc Or, to use my Indian name: Shakes Head Sadly From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 12:47:34 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 13:47:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] File sharers leak government secrets In-Reply-To: <4A756813.2030305@lineone.net> References: <4A756813.2030305@lineone.net> Message-ID: On 8/2/09, ben wrote: > ======================= > "I'm planning to introduce a bill," said Rep. Edolphus Towns, a New York > Democrat who heads a House oversight committee. He said his legislation > would limit the use of peer-to-peer software on all computer networks > operated by the federal government or its contractors. > ======================= > > Ha. Legislate, don't Educate! > Anything to avoid actually teaching people how to use their computers. > > And some people still think a world goverment is a good idea. > You make the rather optimistic assumption that people *can* be educated about computer viruses, spyware, keyloggers, rootkits, web bugs, browser hijacks, trojans, etc. People still send money to our Nigerian friends, you know. Legislation is often a brute force technology that says - 'Just don't do it!' If you wonder why, then you can take the time to educate yourself. Naturally experts will then object to the law cramping their freedom, but that's socialism - for the greater good of all and to protect the weak and feeble-minded. (And you shouldn't diss world government, either. We know you'll like it when we're finished). ;) BillK From painlord2k at libero.it Sun Aug 2 20:33:28 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:33:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] File sharers leak government secrets In-Reply-To: References: <4A756813.2030305@lineone.net> Message-ID: <4A75F818.5060207@libero.it> BillK ha scritto: > You make the rather optimistic assumption that people *can* be > educated about computer viruses, spyware, keyloggers, rootkits, web > bugs, browser hijacks, trojans, etc. People still send money to our > Nigerian friends, you know. If people can not be educated, Is there any way they can be deterred by a law wrote in a book they probably don't know exist? Do you know all and every laws concerning you? Do you follow them all? > Legislation is often a brute force technology that says - 'Just don't > do it!' If you wonder why, then you can take the time to educate > yourself. There are laws against the use of drugs, we see how much they work. There are laws against killing fellows humans, we see how well they work. There are laws against many behaviors, we see how much they work. Could you educate yourself about the "False Ideas of Utility" of Cesare Beccaria? http://www.crimetheory.com/Archive/Beccaria/Beccaria40.htm > > >> ON CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS By CESARE BECCARIA Italy ? 1764 >> >> Chapter 40 Of False Ideas of Utility >> >> >> >> A principal source of errors and injustice are false ideas of >> utility. For example: that legislator has false ideas of utility who >> considers particular more than general conveniencies, who had rather >> command the sentiments of mankind than excite them, and dares say to >> reason, `Be thou a slave'; who would sacrifice a thousand real >> advantages to the fear of an imaginary or trifling inconvenience; who >> would deprive men of the use of fire for fear of their being burnt, >> and of water for fear of their being drowned; and who knows of no >> means of preventing evil but by destroying it. >> >> >> >> The laws of this nature are those which forbid to wear arms, >> disarming those only who are not disposed to commit the crime which >> the laws mean to prevent. Can it be supposed, that those who have the >> courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, and the most >> important of the code, will respect the less considerable and >> arbitrary injunctions, the violation of which is so easy, and of so >> little comparative importance? Does not the execution of this law >> deprive the subject of that personal liberty, so dear to mankind and >> to the wise legislator? and does it not subject the innocent to all >> the disagreeable circumstances that should only fall on the guilty? >> It certainly makes the situation of the assaulted worse, and of the >> assailants better, and rather encourages than prevents murder, as it >> requires less courage to attack unarmed than armed persons. >> >> >> >> It is a false idea of utility that would give to a multitude of >> sensible beings that symmetry and order which inanimate matter is >> alone capable of receiving; to neglect the present, which are the >> only motives that act with force and constancy on the multitude for >> the more distant, whose impressions are weak and transitory, unless >> increased by that strength of imagination so very uncommon among >> mankind. Finally, that is a false idea of utility which, sacrificing >> things to names, separates the public good from that of individuals. >> >> >> >> There is this difference between a state of society and a state of >> nature, that a savage does no more mischief to another than is >> necessary to procure some benefit to himself: but a man in society is >> sometimes tempted, from a fault in the laws, to injure another >> without any prospect of advantage. The tyrant inspires his vassals >> with fear and servility, which rebound upon him with double force, >> and are the cause of his torment. Fear, the more private and domestic >> it is, the less dangerous is it to him who makes it the instrument of >> his happiness; but the more it is public, and the greater number of >> people it affects, the greater is the probability that some mad, >> desperate, or designing person will seduce others to his party by >> flattering expectations; and this will be the more easily >> accomplished as the danger of the enterprise will be divided amongst >> a greater number, because the value the unhappy set upon their >> existence is less, as their misery is greater. > Naturally experts will then object to the law cramping their freedom, > but that's socialism - for the greater good of all and to protect > the weak and feeble-minded. Are you speaking about yourself? Or do you think to be a better man than others you would like to rule? > (And you shouldn't diss world government, either. We know you'll like > it when we're finished). ;) Well, if the world government finish you all, it will have done something good. But it will not be enough to prevent us from destroying it. Mirco From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 21:17:04 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 23:17:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Max More wrote: > P.S. Can a backer of the "consensus" view please point me to a good > explanation of the fact that human emissions of greenhouse gases has > continued unabated, and yet there has been zero global warming over the last > 10 to 11 years? I would appreciate it. (By a "good explanation", I mean one > that doesn't have to resort to something like Ptolemeic epicycles.) I find this quite clear: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/what-if/ The observed warming trend for the last ~50 years is around 0.17?C/year. There is also a scatter due to natural variability (El Nino, etc), which has an amplitude of 0.1 - 0.2?C. Therefore it is entirely possible that in a 10 years period the warming signal may be masked by the natural variation. Using 10 years averages (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009 and so on) reduces the variability by sqrt(10) = about 3, and allows the warming signal to come out quite clearly, as shown in the second graph of tamino's post. Note how the point for the current decade is way higher than the one for the 1990s. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sun Aug 2 21:22:21 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 23:22:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > The observed warming trend for the last ~50 years is around > 0.17?C/year Sorry, I meant 0.017?C/year obviously! From painlord2k at libero.it Sun Aug 2 23:21:27 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:21:27 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> Alfio Puglisi ha scritto: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > >> The observed warming trend for the last ~50 years is around >> 0.17?C/year > > Sorry, I meant 0.017?C/year obviously! Do you know that people, in the '70s were scared by global chilling? They talked so much about "the incoming ice age". So, it appear you start from a minimum. Now, 30 years are a very short time frame to be able to foretell the climate in the next 50. During the Roman times, in England people could grow grapes for wine. Now, I think it is impossible because it is too cold. So, it is too cold or too hot in England, today? And, before telling there is a heating, please, could tell us what is the right temperature for any and all places on Earth? Is it the temperature of today? the temperature of 30 years ago? The temperature of 2 hundreds years (during the Little Ice Age)? Mirco From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 3 00:27:26 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 17:27:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> Message-ID: <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Mirco Romanato > ... > > > > Sorry, I meant 0.017?C/year obviously! > > Do you know that people, in the '70s were scared by global chilling?... > Mirco Mirco, whaddya mean in the 70s? I worry about global cooling now. The sunspot count is so low there is a reasonable possibility we could be going into another Dalton minimum, which would whoop our species bigtime, we being indigenous to Africa but having spread all over the globe. Looks to me like we have *plenty* of margin to get warmer on this planet, but very little tolerance for cooler. spike From spike66 at att.net Mon Aug 3 05:04:04 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:04:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] health care again In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2E8859B5986347579C9908150047A8EA@spike> Here's the ABC news take on proposed health care changes, including something we discussed at length here, comparisons to Canada's system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdx_2cuPgQQ&feature=player_embedded I welcome comments by those who know or are interested. Stossel's comment right at the last few seconds is really a knockout, ja? spike From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 10:17:02 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 12:17:02 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Mirco Romanato wrote: > During the Roman times, in England people could grow grapes for wine. > Now, I think it is impossible because it is too cold. Where do you get this idea? There's plenty of vineyards in England: http://www.wine-searcher.com/regions-england > Do you know that people, in the '70s were scared by global chilling? > They talked so much about "the incoming ice age". Popular opinion and scientific opinion often differ. Climate scientists in the '70s where nailing down the effect of co2 and starting to predict warming. A good summary of the discovery process can be found here: http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm (that's a chapter of Spencer Weart's excellent "the discovery of global warming" book). > Now, 30 years are a very short time frame to be able to foretell the > climate in the next 50. It would be too short if you where just fitting a line to a series of point. But climate models rely on physics. > So, it is too cold or too hot in England, today? > > And, before telling there is a heating, please, could tell us what is > the right temperature for any and all places on Earth? > > Is it the temperature of today? the temperature of 30 years ago? > The temperature of 2 hundreds years (during the Little Ice Age)? Your questions miss the point. The problem is not the "right" or "wrong" temperature, nor a "change". The problem is when the rate of change outstrips the ability of the ecosystem to adapt. Similar considerations can be made about the rate of sea level rise with respect to human infrastructure. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 10:26:27 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 12:26:27 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030326m79350cf3mdc57ccb9657b15b@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:27 AM, spike wrote: > Mirco, whaddya mean in the 70s? ?I worry about global cooling now. ?The > sunspot count is so low there is a reasonable possibility we could be going > into another Dalton minimum A better measure is the solar constant, which directly influences Earth''s temperature. This "constant" is not constant at all: http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant To give an idea of the variation, the total climate forcing to get an ice age is estimated to be equivalent to 6 or 7 W/m^2. Alfio From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 12:21:38 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:21:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > > It would be too short if you where just fitting a line to a series of > point. But climate models rely on physics. ### Not quite. Climate is so poorly understood that the models are actually exercises in curve fitting (you know that term, right?). They do not know the CO2 climate sensitivity, and are yet completely incapable of predicting climate over periods of a few years, much less decades (not a single published model predicted the current period of global cooling when it started in 1998) ------------------------------------------ > > Your questions miss the point. The problem is not the "right" or > "wrong" temperature, nor a "change". The problem is when the rate of > change outstrips the ability of the ecosystem to adapt. Similar > considerations can be made about the rate of sea level rise with > respect to human infrastructure. ### Our infrastructure cannot deal with destroying fifteen or more trillion dollars that would be necessary to stop anthropogenic CO2 emissions. But both our infrastructure and all ecosystems can easily deal even with the grossly exaggerated changes predicted by the IPCC. Rafal From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Aug 3 13:57:21 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:57:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: RE: [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: If posters are not posting to both Extropy-chat and WTA-talk lists, please change the subject line to reflect this. Thank you. Natasha Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 14:43:18 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:43:18 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: >> >> It would be too short if you where just fitting a line to a series of >> point. But climate models rely on physics. > > ### Not quite. Climate is so poorly understood that the models are > actually exercises in curve fitting (you know that term, right?). They > do not know the CO2 climate sensitivity, and are yet completely > incapable of predicting climate over periods of a few years, much less > decades (not a single published model predicted the current period of > global cooling when it started in 1998) I see various wrong things in that paragraph: 1) If you want to criticize models, you better make sure that you know how they work. Current climatic models *cannot*, by design, reproduce the climate signal over a time span as short as 10 years. The weather is just too chaotic for that. To get a feeling of what is the output of a climate model is, check out the picture in this article: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/what-the-ipcc-models-really-say/langswitch_lang/en/ The single lines are individual model runs with different starting conditions, and the black line is the average. Notice how one single line is extremely variable and goes over and under the mean for many years straight. The "real" Earth climate would be like one of those lines. 2) "and are yet completely incapable of predicting climate over periods of a few years, much less decades" You have it backwards. It's easier to predict climate over decades than over a few years, because random processes (weather) and oscillations (ENSO, etc) will average out. 3) "the current period of global cooling when it started in 1998" can you please provide a reference (with numbers) for a "global cooling started in 1998"? Plotting GISS data from 1998 to 2008 I get a positive slope of +0.0106 ?C/year, too small to be statistically significant given the variation of the period, but hardly evidence of "cooling". > ### Our infrastructure cannot deal with destroying fifteen or more > trillion dollars that would be necessary to stop anthropogenic CO2 > emissions. Can you please give a reference for that $15T number? Did you also find the cost of not stopping the CO2 emission (that is, the cost of adaption), and compared? >But both our infrastructure and all ecosystems can easily > deal even with the grossly exaggerated changes predicted by the IPCC. IPCC predictions are *explicitly* underestimated, because they don't include most of the ice feedbacks. The reason is that, at the time of the IPCC report, the predictions were too uncertain. The next IPCC report will include some of the known ice feedbacks, and the numbers will be higher. To conclude, a point about logic. You write: "Climate is so poorly understood...." If you think this is true, why you are also sure that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will change nothing? Why do you think that the change will be smaller than the IPCC says and not, for example, much higher? Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 14:50:52 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:50:52 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: * It's easier to predict climate over decades than over a few years, because random processes (weather) and oscillations (ENSO, etc) will average out. *Where can I see one prediction over a few decades? Besides that one of warming right now, what doesn't happening, or an older one of global cooling? - Thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 15:07:49 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:07:49 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/3 Tomaz Kristan : > > Where can I see one prediction over a few decades? The IPCC report: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_report.htm Chapter SPM, figure SPM.5 gives a summary of the prediction. Or did you mean something more specific? > Besides that one of warming right now, what doesn't happening, or an older > one of global cooling? I don't know of any quantitative prediction for global cooling, but I've been following this subject only for a few years. Can you show me one of those predictions? Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 15:15:15 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:15:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] META: RE: [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030815r307821e2v1dfe3c9d5cc573bc@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > If posters are not posting to both Extropy-chat and WTA-talk lists, please > change the subject line to reflect this. > > Thank you. > > Natasha > Sorry for the confusion. I notice now that Max's second email was sent to both lists, but the reply-to was set to only ExI. Probably a feature of the list server? (i do not subscribe to wta-talk) Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 15:22:00 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:22:00 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: There is *no* climate prediction for a few decades time, which came true. Sorry. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Aug 3 15:32:38 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:32:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Subject Line & Email List Message-ID: Please make sure the subject line reflects which email list your messages are being sent to. Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 731 bytes Desc: not available URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 15:50:41 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:50:41 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/3 Tomaz Kristan : > There is no climate prediction for a few decades time, which came true. Hansen et al. published a prediction in 1988. Hansen has been the subject of much heat after that (pun intended :) In 2006, the prediction were reviewed, and it turns out that their "B" scenario (described as the "most plausible" between three different scenarios examined in 1988) predicted accurately the later trend. See the report: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2006/Hansen_etal_1.html This is a bit less of 20 years, so I'm not sure that it qualifies for "a few decades". I know of no earlier quantititative prediction. If you know of others, please share. ".. which came true". Can you show me the ones which didn't come true? Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 16:57:28 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:57:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: *Can you show me the ones which didn't come true?* Why should I? There is no "other decade long predictions came true". Just a lot of a bullshiting around. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 17:18:12 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:18:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/3 Tomaz Kristan : > Can you show me the ones which didn't come true? > > Why should I? There is no "other decade long predictions came true". > > Just a lot of a bullshiting around. I gave you the Hansen 1988 prediction and 2006 verification. Does it fit your "climate prediction for a few decades time, which came true" criterion? If not, why? Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 17:37:32 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:37:32 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: What prediction? What decades have passed since? They have a poor case. Very poor, or no case at all. According to them, should be warmer now than it was in 1998. But it isn't. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:08:58 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:08:58 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/3 Tomaz Kristan : > What prediction? The 1988 one. Read the paper I linked. >What decades have passed since? Two. > They have a poor case. Very poor, or no case at all. > > According to them, should be warmer now than it was in 1998. But it isn't. That's not what they say. Again, read the paper before dismissing it. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:23:27 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:23:27 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Why should I? I will, if they predicted recent cooling. AFAIK they didn't. Now, did they? I will read it if they did. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:32:07 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:32:07 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908031132y7e5619c3m8ff2388cb3bdd028@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/3 Tomaz Kristan : > I will, if they predicted recent cooling. AFAIK they didn't. > > Now, did they? I will read it if they did. They didn't predict cooling, and in fact cooling did not occur. > Why should I? To know what you are arguing about. I can't continue discussing with you if you don't read references. Alfio From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:38:20 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:38:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] [Open Manufacturing] Re: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? In-Reply-To: <6ee2332b0908031121q35966229o9b5396bfb3a14402@mail.gmail.com> References: <28c9b9bd-7acf-40ca-85e9-1e84ff3b6a24@r2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <6ee2332b0908030656o506c7ee9q58ab51e1f1ee1d98@mail.gmail.com> <55ad6af70908031052q4647efbbv85c0355a725e3eed@mail.gmail.com> <6ee2332b0908031121q35966229o9b5396bfb3a14402@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908031138w232e6ccaq6fc1e9d4facacb81@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Philippe Van Nedervelde wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Philippe Van Nedervelde wrote: >> > But brand products and other products with added-value design or with IP >> > (licenses) involved... will still cost. Some may even still cost >> > (relatively) a lot. >> >> Meh, the rest of us will ignore your "IP laws". > > *My* IP laws?? That's what you're proposing, isn't it? That "brand products and other products with IP (licenses) involved.. will still cost." But that's not true at all: it only costs if you pay up for it, which isn't something that you need to do if you can just do it yourself with machines that you don't even have to figure out how to program. >> > An example: you will still pay something for your future nanofactured >> > iPhone >> > 7G S or newest model of all-electric newest model Ferrari. The structure >> > of >> >> Sorry Philippe: I will not now, nor will I ever, pay for my >> nanofactured iphone. I'll nanofacture it myself. > > > Not without first paying future-Apple for the license to materialize it with > your nanofactory. No payment, no nanofacturing green light. What is a red light? Some angry guy throwing chairs by psychic telekinesis? > Unless you will knowingly and willfully nanofacture an illegal knock-off, or > do so using a stolen?or cracked nanofacturable file. Why are you proposing encrypted nanofacturable package files anyway? That doesn't sound useful to humans. >> (Actually, I won't, >> because nobody has a complete working model of MEMS or nano >> manufacturing at the moment (diamond mechanosynthesis does not count), >> so in the mean time I'll stick with some plastic injection molding and >> factories that I've been meaning to build.) > > OK :-)? RepRap??? I'm a fan. Maybe. I'm not so sure. I'm not actually interested in building a case at the moment (plastic cases are very over-rated), and even if I was, I am not sure I'd want to go with the reprap approach. >> > that payment will be, overwhelmingly, for licenses and "brand" value, >> > with >> > (nearly) insignificant percentages for assembly, handling, materials and >> > other classic cost-places. >> I don't know if the singularity can be "licensed". > > Being realistic, it's a safe bet to count on some to try. But if someone else gets there first and just gives the tech away, that's it- some people might "try" but the proliferation of free technology will occur whether or not there exists other solutions out there. Something about the mean path of least resistance. >> > Note that Eric (Drexler), Rob (Freitas), Ralph (Merkle), Josh (Storrs >> > Hall), >> > Christine (Peterson) etc. never said or wrote that everything would >> > become >> > "free". >> >> However, many of the discussions on openmanufacturing have pointed in >> that direction (not necessarily with nanotechnology's involvement). > > Ok by me. It will be interesting to see what actually transpires. > >> > Note that the ways things are going now, acquiring your (personal?) >> > nanofacturing device is more likely than not to cost you something too. >> > At >> >> That's why you shouldn't "acquire it" and just build it. > > You are going to build your own nanofactory? You aren't? Either I will build my tools, or my tools will build my tools for me. Gentoo users are some of my best friends. >> > least initially, early on, this may even be a pretty penny. It's just in >> > my >> >> That's only if you're willing to pay for it. > > Many will be willing.?The?overwhelming majority cannot "just build it" for > themselves. That's only because you don't know how to tell them how to build it. And the only reason for *that* is you don't know how to build it. Gentoo users don't have to be told about kernel secrets just to compile their desktop computer system, and yet it happens every day of every year, thousands of times a day. Imagine that.. >> > proposals for an explicitly philanthropic "Abundance For All" project >> > that >> > your personal nanofactory would not cost you anything. >> >> If you give a man a fish.. > > Yes. And your point is? Why not teach them how to fish instead of just giving it to them? Paul Fernhout likes to run around these parts talking about some issues related to putting post-scarcity tools into the hands of scarcity-preoccupied individuals. I suppose people might still be pre-occupied with scarcity even once they build or know how to build their machine, but it's likely that by the time they are done, they would realize what it is capable of doing. >> > products. But others, for various reasons, are seriously considering the >> > option of making a business out of selling feedstock to nanofactory >> > owners. > >> Why wouldn't nanofactories be able to build machines to create feedstock? > > Indeed. Rob (Freitas) for instance worries that this could too easily lead > to malicious abuses. Think of (somehow) (autonomous) mobile nanofactories > which go around converting stuff around them to create more copies of > themselves. You have to deal with that type of situation anyway, because it's already happened once in evolutionary history. > I think that that is arguably far-fetched, but there you have it. Nah, I don't think it's far fetched, but I don't see what it has to do with whether or not I will fabricate components to such a device to be able to harvest feedstock from its surrounding materials (etc.). >> > They reckon that might yield them a (quite lucrative) business model >> > like >> > that of printer cartridges, razor blades and after-market car parts and >> > accessories. >> >> I don't understand why I would want to buy a print cartridge when I >> could just harvest feedstock automatically myself- with minimal effort >> and automation that is expected of nano-anything. > > You are too readily assuming that you would obtain the mature nanofacturing > capability without strings attached intended to prevent malicious abuses. > Odds are you won't get the raw power unfettered. And that's probably a good > thing. Then what are your thoughts on bootstrapping in linux kernels? Whoever worked on that- are they going to burn in hell for their sins or something? That would be absurd. >> > So, no, it will most likely not all be free. Certainly not initially. > >> Maybe you should try to change that, Philippe. > > Maybe I already tried? See my Abundance For All proposal(s). So far, A4A is > not getting (enough) traction. I'll keep at it though. Gutta cavat lapidem, > non vi sed saepe cadendo. ;-) What does traction have to do with anything? The beauty of these exponential explosions is that they don't have to have any traction at all save for at least one person (or optionally more) who is able to get it done. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From protokol2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:44:15 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:44:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908031132y7e5619c3m8ff2388cb3bdd028@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031132y7e5619c3m8ff2388cb3bdd028@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: What references? Give me a link to a the recent warming. If there was no cooling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clementlawyer at hotmail.com Mon Aug 3 18:57:09 2009 From: clementlawyer at hotmail.com (James Clement) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 11:57:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] h+ Magazine Coverage for Space Elevator Conference Message-ID: I was wondering if anyone is already planning on attending the Space Elevator Conference in Seattle, WA and would like to earn a small fee to do a contemporaneous article for the h+ Magazine website? If so, please contact me a.s.a.p. http://www.spaceelevatorconference.org/ Best regards, James James Clement Publisher, h+ Magazine jwclement at hplusmagazine.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:01:28 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:01:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? In-Reply-To: <948b11e0908031249m1d5d99edm9bd24070a30a5d63@mail.gmail.com> References: <28c9b9bd-7acf-40ca-85e9-1e84ff3b6a24@r2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <6ee2332b0908030656o506c7ee9q58ab51e1f1ee1d98@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e0908031249m1d5d99edm9bd24070a30a5d63@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908031301t8ff162cr71cc6e903240c128@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Samantha Atkins Date: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:49 PM Subject: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? To: cosmic-engineers at googlegroups.com On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Philippe Van Nedervelde wrote: > > With my Foresight Institute rep hat on, I'll say that things will be incomparable cheaper to *produce*. That does not necessarily mean they will all be "free" to the end-user, the "consumer". > > Yes, generic basics, staple goods may become virtually free. > > But brand products and other products with added-value design or with IP (licenses) involved... will still cost. Some may even still cost (relatively) a lot. > > An example: you will still pay something for your future nanofactured iPhone 7G S or newest model of all-electric newest model Ferrari. The structure of that payment will be, overwhelmingly, for licenses and "brand" value, with (nearly) insignificant percentages for assembly, handling, materials and other classic cost-places. Actually, I would not bet on this.? The designers/integrators will be rewarded for their innovation.? But with distributed MNT, counter-top MNT machines, only the information - the actual desing bits is needed beyond what the MNT unit and its matter energy feeds can handle.? In short information is the thing, is all "things" except for raw matter and energy. ?? It will not be in our interest to propagade too many limitations on information access and distribution.? It both impoverishes us through decreased innovation and greatly endangers us through more and more draconian attempts to for information corrals and boundaries in a world of more and more capable information appliances up to and including matter printers / replicators. This cannot be done.? Eventually our concepts of IP must change drastically if we are to have a viable future. > > > Note that Eric (Drexler), Rob (Freitas), Ralph (Merkle), Josh (Storrs Hall), Christine (Peterson) etc. never said or wrote that everything would become "free". How is that relevant to whether many more things than we may think today can, should or possibly can become free? > > Note that the ways things are going now, acquiring your (personal?) nanofacturing device is more likely than not to cost you something too. At least initially, early on, this may even be a pretty penny. It's just in my proposals for an explicitly philanthropic "Abundance For All" project that your personal nanofactory would not cost you anything. For sure there will not be an instaneous transition.? However, I think we must begin to lay the groundwork with more and more liberalization of IP laws and envisioning the impilcations of evolving technology and abilities. > > > There's also the issue of feedstock. My preference would be for the nanofactories to have -either built-in or as a companion device- the ability to disassemble waste etc. into feedstock needed for the assembly of new products. But others, for various reasons, are seriously considering the option of making a business out of selling feedstock to nanofactory owners. Likely some level of feed will be a public utility.? Limitations on feedstock to lock in customers should not be allowed.? Lock ins of various kinds so common in corporate world today need to be seen as limiting our future viability. > > They reckon that might yield them a (quite lucrative) business model like that of printer cartridges, razor blades and after-market car parts and accessories. Printer cartridges are one of most regressive business practices you could bring up as an example.? :) Yes it will not initially all be free.? Some things may never be.? But anything that can be made from energy, raw matter and information about construction will someday be as cheap and easy to duplicate as anything that is just bits today.?? In that world saying that the creators of a particular arrangement should totally control how this information should be used and its replication into material form does not make a lot of sense and is not enforceable without a police state of terrifying power.?? Yes, we need to find a way of attribution that works and a way to reward innovation.??? But IP as we currently have it is very unlikely to be the correct way to do this going forward. - samantha --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cosmic Engineers" group. To post to this group, send email to cosmic-engineers at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cosmic-engineers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cosmic-engineers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From clementlawyer at hotmail.com Mon Aug 3 20:46:11 2009 From: clementlawyer at hotmail.com (James Clement) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:46:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] [h+] Alex Lightman Appointed Executive Director of Humanity+ In-Reply-To: <57803627CD39584B9492656EB555A51E66766433@b65-exmb3> References: <57803627CD39584B9492656EB555A51E66766433@b65-exmb3> Message-ID: Congratulations Alex! Best regards, James James Clement Publisher, h+ Magazine > From: James.Hughes at trincoll.edu > To: wta-announce at transhumanism.org > Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:16:00 -0400 > Subject: [wta-talk] [h+] Alex Lightman Appointed Executive Director of Humanity+ > > PRESS RELEASE > > For Immediate Release: August 3, 2009 > > Alex Lightman Appointed Executive Director of Humanity+ > > Los Angeles, August 3, 2009 - The Board of Directors of Humanity+ is pleased to announce the appointment of Mr. Alex Lightman as its new Executive Director. > > "Mr. Lightman brings to the job significant experience in the technology world and H+ is thrilled that he is taking the reins to help grow our organization," said Dr. James Hughes, Secretary, Humanity+. > > About Alex Lightman > > Mr. Lightman is an author, serial entrepreneur, and futurist, who has made significant contributions to the adoption of IPv6, written and spoken on the future of technology since 1985 and has authored numerous articles and a book on technology and society. He is the author of the first book on 4G wireless broadband, Brave New Unwired World: The Digital Big Bang and the Infinite Internet (John Wiley, 2002), which made predictions about the future of computers and communications that are consistent with the actual growth of Internet and mobile technologies. He has published over 130 articles, including six articles in H+ magazine in 2009, has spoken in over 40 countries, including at the United Nations space conference, at US embassies in Europe and Asia, and at hundreds of conferences. > > He is currently CTO of FutureMax Group and CTO of the Intergovernmental Renewable Energy Organization, and. His company, Charmed Technology, was a pioneer of wearable computers, and he holds patents in the fields of wearable/mobile/pervasive computing and related communications and software. He has sold wearable computers to military, industrial and academic users, deployed "Charmed Badges" at locations as diverse as a Navy ship and a CEO conference, and developed the first augmented reality for a live performance, with the UK tour of Duran Duran in 2001. He was the producer of Charmed Technology's "Brave New Unwired World" wireless technology fashion show, which has been performed over 100 times at venues in fifteen countries, including the US, Europe, Asia, Israel, and Australia. Mr. Lightman is a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology ('83), and attended graduate school at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. > About Humanity+ > > Humanity+ is an international nonprofit membership organization which advocates the ethical use of technology to expand human capacities. We support the development of and access to new technologies that enable everyone to enjoy sharper minds, healthier bodies, greater freedoms, and better lives. In other words, we want people to be better than well. Our website is: http://humanityplus.org/ > > Contact: Dr. James J. Hughes, Secretary, Humanity+ > Phone: 860-297-2376 Fax: 860-297-4136 > secretary at humanityplus.org > http://humanityplus.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > wta-announce mailing list > wta-announce at transhumanism.org > http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-announce > _______________________________________________ > wta-talk mailing list > wta-talk at transhumanism.org > http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Mon Aug 3 21:34:55 2009 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:34:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908030807i77914637od98cb0f7563837db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030850v54d87679i42a7b6a5615a21e9@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031018t5b219a6do26db35ab849a8372@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031108h6fc12b23i8d3890e2e0bb9a3b@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908031132y7e5619c3m8ff2388cb3bdd028@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090803213455.GA13120@ofb.net> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 08:44:15PM +0200, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > > What references? > Give me a link to a the recent warming. If there was no cooling. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/ plus a graph Krugman didn't link to directly http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/temperature-trends/ Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Glacier_Mass_Balance.png http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/anomalies/index.php as for sunspots http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Solar_variation yes wikipedia but they have references When data is inherently noisy, 3 recent slightly cooler years don't wipe out decades of a warming trend. http://mediamatters.org/research/200903300035 "The 11 warmest years on record occurred in the past 13 years." http://mediamatters.org/research/200906290049 {"1998 was a record-breaking warm year as long-term man-made warming combined with a naturally occurring strong El Ni??o. In contrast, 2008 was slightly cooler than previous years partly because of a La Ni??a. Despite this, it was still the 10th warmest on record."} -xx- Damien X-) From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 3 21:53:51 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:53:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> Max More: >>Can a backer of the "consensus" view please point me to a good >>explanation of the fact that human emissions of greenhouse gases has >>continued unabated, and yet there has been zero global warming over the >>last 10 to 11 years? Alfio Puglisi >it is entirely possible that in a 10 years period the warming signal may >be masked by the natural variation. If the signal is that weak then it sounds to me like it's nothing to get all hot and bothered about; and besides, "entirely possible" is just not good enough. It's "entirely possible" that cutting your legs off would improve your health, but if your doctor told you that I'll bet you'd have some very serious questions to ask before you let a scalpel get anywhere near your legs. You're telling millions of people that they must starve to death and you're telling about a billion more to remain in poverty, because despite all the empty talk about renewable energy, realistically that is the price you're going to have to pay if you really want to get serious about stopping carbon emissions and you're not just making another trillion dollar gesture as in the Kyoto accords. So before you do anything that drastic you better be damn sure the effect is real and would lead to an asteroid crashing into Chiksulub level catastrophe if nothing is done. Are you really that sure? And I do find it tedious that environmentalist hand wringers always act like they own the moral high ground when it could be argued that Rachel Carson and the gang of DDT defamers she inspired killed more people than Hitler. > The problem is not the "right" or "wrong" temperature, nor a "change". > The problem is when the rate of change outstrips the ability of the > ecosystem to adapt. If you picked any time at random in the last 100 million years you can be almost certain that is was warmer than now, possibly MUCH warmer; at one time Antarctica was subtropical and the home of cold blooded reptiles, and yet back then the continent was only slightly further north than it is now. And in spite of all this the ecosystem on this planet adapted, life still exists. > Similar considerations can be made about the rate of sea level rise with > respect to human infrastructure. And that's another thing that I find very puzzling, if it's been getting so damn hot then ice is going to melt, so where the hell has all that water gone? The sea has risen about 6 inches during the last century, and it has risen about 6 inches a century for the last 6 thousand years. Not very surprising really, the sea has risen 410 feet in the last 20 thousand years and you wouldn't expect a powerful trend like that to stop on a dime. John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Aug 3 22:17:25 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:17:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph Message-ID: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> eg: in ref to http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/temperature-trends/ E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12960 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 3 22:34:40 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:34:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > If you want to criticize models, you better make sure that you know how > they work. Climate models work? That's news to me. Let me ask you something, if the world's temperature increases will that create more clouds or fewer clouds? It's a very simple question with profound consequences because clouds regulate the amount of solar energy that runs the entire climate show. Increased temperature means more water evaporates from the sea, but it also means the atmosphere can hold more water before it is forced to form clouds. So who wins this tug of war? Nobody knows. So how do these marvelous climate models you speak of deal with this? They ignore it. And then there is the important issue of global dimming. For reasons that are not clearly understood at any given temperature it takes longer now for water to evaporate now than it did 50 years ago. How do these marvelous climate models deal with this interesting fact? They ignore it, every fucking single one of them. And you are asking billions of people to quite literally bet their lives on the accuracy of these two bit climate models. John K Clark From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 22:37:46 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:37:46 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:53 PM, John K Clark wrote: > > Alfio Puglisi > >> it is entirely possible that in a 10 years period the warming signal may >> be masked by the natural variation. > > If the signal is that weak then it sounds to me like it's nothing to get all > hot and bothered about; and besides, "entirely possible" is just not good > enough. I quantified the signal, and the noise. In that context, "entirely possible" is a statistical truism. About the bothering, whether the noise masks the signal over 5, 10 or 50 years depends on the relative magnitude of those numbers, and have nothing to do on whether you should be bothered or not. > You're telling millions of people that they must starve to death and you're > telling about a billion more to remain in poverty, because despite all the > empty talk about renewable energy, realistically that is the price you're > going to have to pay if you really want to get serious about stopping carbon > emissions Stop this hyperbole. The IPCC quantified the additional expense in energy investment at max $2T over 25 years (with a lower estimate of "negligible"), in the whole world. This is on top of $20T already planned under business as usual, so I don't see this big difference. (see IPCC AR4, chaper 4.3). by the way, what is your estimate of people starving to death or remaining in poverty if we don't take action?. >> The problem is not the "right" or "wrong" temperature, nor a "change". >> The problem is when the rate of change outstrips the ability of the >> ecosystem to adapt. > > If you picked any time at random in the last 100 million years you can be > almost certain that is was warmer than now, possibly MUCH warmer; at one > time Antarctica was subtropical and the home of cold blooded reptiles, and > yet back then the continent was only slightly further north than it is now. > And in spite of all this the ecosystem on this planet adapted, life still > exists. You are missing the point entirely. I said that the problem is not the change, nor the actual temperature, but the speed at which climatic parameters change. For example, the rapid up and down changes that you can see in this graph of the last ice ages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png work out to be at max ~ 10?C over 10,000 years, or 0.1?C/century. Our current rate is already more than ten times that, and it is projected to accelerate further. > >> Similar considerations can be made about the rate of sea level rise with >> respect to human infrastructure. > > And that's another thing that I find very puzzling, if it's been getting so > damn hot then ice is going to melt, so where the hell has all that water > gone? > > The sea has risen about 6 inches during the last century, and it has risen > about 6 inches a century for the last 6 thousand years. Not very surprising > really, the sea has risen 410 feet in the last 20 thousand years and you > wouldn't expect a powerful trend like that to stop on a dime. Finally some numbers. But you don't cite your sources, so I don't know why they are so wrong. Here are the correct (approximate) ones: 16,000 to 6,000 years ago: almost 4 foot/century (the post-glacial rise that you mentiones) Last 6,000 years: about 2 inches/century (stability. the "powerful trend" basically stopped). Last century: 7 inches/century Last 20 years: 10 inches/century Next century: 3-4 foot/century You can derive these trends looking at these various graphs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Sea_Level.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Recent_Sea_Level_Rise.png The last two numbers come from the text of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise Alfio From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Aug 3 22:46:01 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:46:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph In-Reply-To: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> References: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> An exchange between me and my missus: [Barbara:] >Resources would be better allocated to research into food crops that >can withstand heat and drought; alternative food sources such as >yeasts; sunblocking aerosols (although I am frightened by the >thought that people might do something like this without really >understanding how it works and end up making things much worse). Yes, of course, I basically agree. Plus doing some work to make sure levees are strong enough to handle major floods or whatever (because it's probably cheaper than building entirely new cities elsewhere), plus it would be nice to spread contraception worldwide, and fast track MNT and AI development if possible. A lot of the current policies seem to mix up "we're all sinners and deserve to die unless we repent" with peak oil and other likely real problems that need a blend of commonsense (pale roofs, gray water) and innovation (cheap/better solar and batteries, maybe safe nukes, maybe clever cheap fusion). Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12960 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Mon Aug 3 22:54:39 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:54:39 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:34 AM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> If you want to criticize models, you better make sure that you know how >> they work. > > Climate models work? That's news to me. Let me ask you something, if the > world's temperature increases will that create more clouds or fewer clouds? We don't know. > It's a very simple question with profound consequences because clouds > regulate the amount of solar energy that runs the entire climate show. > Increased temperature means more water evaporates from the sea, but it also > means the atmosphere can hold more water before it is forced to form clouds. > So who wins this tug of war? Nobody knows. So how do these marvelous climate > models you speak of deal with this? They ignore it. > > And then there is the important issue of global dimming. For reasons that > are not clearly understood at any given temperature it takes longer now for > water to evaporate now than it did 50 years ago. How do these marvelous > climate models deal with this interesting fact? They ignore it, every > fucking single one of them. First, "ignore" is the wrong term. These areas are actively researched, for the very reasons that they are among the few missing pieces after the easy ones (CO2, other GHG gases, water vapor, volcanic eruptions, glacier retreat, ice feedback, ocean-atmosphere coupling, thermoaline circulation,... should i continue?) are now pretty well known. Second, you might not be aware that global dimming apparently stopped in the 1990s and is now reversing. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming If this trend continues, estimates will need to be revised upward, but probably not by much. Third, I find it interesting that you take the few unknowns in the models and use them to invalidate the entire story. There must be a name for this rhetorical trick that escapes me now. > And you are asking billions of people to quite literally bet their lives on > the accuracy of these two bit climate models. I don't, see previous post. You, instead, appear to discount any evidence of warming, relying on some magical clouds that will appear just in the right quantity to keep you cool even when you put on a jacket. Who's betting here? Alfio From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Mon Aug 3 23:08:16 2009 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:08:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph In-Reply-To: <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> References: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 05:46:01PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > An exchange between me and my missus: > > [Barbara:] > >> Resources would be better allocated to research into food crops that >> can withstand heat and drought; alternative food sources such as >> yeasts; sunblocking aerosols (although I am frightened by the thought >> that people might do something like this without really understanding >> how it works and end up making things much worse). > > Yes, of course, I basically agree. Plus doing some work to make sure > levees are strong enough to handle major floods or whatever (because > it's probably cheaper than building entirely new cities elsewhere), plus Why is this better than trying to get off fossil carbon and removing CO2 from the atmosphere? Levees mean you're increasing the number of possible failure points; bad engineering if you can avoid it. Sunblocking schemes don't stop the acidification of the ocean, and create another global failure point if relied upon long-term rather than used as a stopgap before reversing carbon emissions. You're also blocking more and more of the light that drives photosynthesis. > it would be nice to spread contraception worldwide, and fast track MNT > and AI development if possible. A lot of the current policies seem to mix We have no real idea of how to do MNT or AI. We know how to build solar plants, nuclear plants, solar ovens, Franklin stoves (more efficient wood use), energy-efficient homes, biochar, etc. Why do you want to rely on the magic tech and not the proven tech? -xx- Damien X-) From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Aug 3 23:36:38 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:36:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph In-Reply-To: <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> References: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20090803233641397.SRMN557@cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com> At 04:08 PM 8/3/2009 -0700, Damien X wrote: >We know how to build solar >plants, nuclear plants, solar ovens, Franklin stoves (more efficient >wood use), energy-efficient homes, biochar, etc. Why do you want to >rely on the magic tech and not the proven tech? 1) It's more fun and sexy, and doesn't have breast-beating and wailing built in. 2) Who said "rely"? But it should be a component. Damien B. E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12960 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From jonkc at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 3 23:44:37 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:44:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > Last century: [sea level rise] 7 inches/century I said 6 inches/century, but I won't fight you over that last inch; after all it's in my favor. > Last 20 years: 10 inches/century So in the last 20 years the sea has risen 10 inches a century. Huh? > Next century: 3-4 foot/century Let me know where you got your time machine. > Stop this hyperbole. The IPCC quantified the additional expense in energy > investment at max $2T over 25 years Fuck the IPCC! If you're really serious about this, and I mean serious, you're going to have to abandon fossil fuels and that means condemning millions to death and billions to poverty. And all the ethanol alcohol and wind farm fantasies in the world won't change that. I'm not happy about it, I wish there were a alternative, but there isn't, and raging against the inevitable is stupid. > what is your estimate of people starving to death or > remaining in poverty if we don't take action? Like it or not the world runs on fossil fuels. Take that away then the world won't run. If the world doesn't run then people are going to die. Lots and lots and lots and lots of people. That's when the obscene term "Mega Death" would come into its own. I have no doubt that you are a good person and I have no doubt you wish the very best for the world, but wishing does not make it so. Good intentions are not enough; you've got to be smart. John K Clark From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 4 01:16:43 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:16:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbabledream? In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908031301t8ff162cr71cc6e903240c128@mail.gmail.com> References: <28c9b9bd-7acf-40ca-85e9-1e84ff3b6a24@r2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com><6ee2332b0908030656o506c7ee9q58ab51e1f1ee1d98@mail.gmail.com><948b11e0908031249m1d5d99edm9bd24070a30a5d63@mail.gmail.com> <55ad6af70908031301t8ff162cr71cc6e903240c128@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <18256475C3C2498ABCADD9D8C3BD2B0F@spike> ...? ?? But IP as we currently have it is very unlikely to be the correct way to do this going forward. - samantha Samantha! Where the heck have ya been? Welcome back, hadn't seen any Samantha posts in a long time. spike From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Aug 4 02:29:34 2009 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:29:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> References: <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 07:44:37PM -0400, John K Clark wrote: > I said 6 inches/century, but I won't fight you over that last inch; after > all it's in my favor. > >> Last 20 years: 10 inches/century > > So in the last 20 years the sea has risen 10 inches a century. Huh? The obvious interpretation is that the sea has risen at a rate that would be 10 inches/century, if it went on for a century. Normalized units. >> Next century: 3-4 foot/century > > Let me know where you got your time machine. Called "models". > Like it or not the world runs on fossil fuels. Take that away then the > world won't run. If the world doesn't run then people are going to > die. Lots and Funny how people who believe in nanotech and AI and such have trouble with closer and more plausible visions. Like nuclear/solar/geothermal providing the basic power, and liquid fuels being synthesized from biomass or atmospheric CO2 for applications requiring such. It would take a lot of work to build the infrastructure, but then it took a lot of work to build our existing infrastructure; there's nothing inherently difficult about it. We know how to build nuke plants, we know how to synthesize fuels, it's practically plug-and-play. Raise fossil carbon taxes high enough and the market will probably build it for us. -xx- Damien X-) From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 4 04:06:00 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:06:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com><6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> Message-ID: <468EEF57C84B4A3B8BE9ABA1B48777D6@MyComputer> "Damien Sullivan" > Funny how people who believe in nanotech and AI and such have > trouble with closer and more plausible visions. Like > nuclear/solar/geothermal providing the basic power, and liquid > fuels being synthesized from biomass Help me out, what's funny about that? Ideas like Nanotech and AI are entirely logical and smart as hell. Other concepts, like synthesizing ethanol alcohol for fuel from a substance called "corn" that Homo Sapiens happens to like to eat, is an idea that is as dumb as dog shit. Please explain what's funny about this. John K Clark From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 04:15:02 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 23:15:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [SpaceRenaissance-497] Re: IOSI - The International Open Space Initiative In-Reply-To: <8BA7EA2A-5078-4E19-BB5A-1487D287B2D9@gmail.com> References: <20090725083602.GM23524@leitl.org> <55ad6af70907250330l76475d5tb0020b80b8a07936@mail.gmail.com> <0f583d16-ecad-4e59-b795-76a05eabca6f@l5g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <8BA7EA2A-5078-4E19-BB5A-1487D287B2D9@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908032115q18330d6fq772dcc96c41a7678@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eric Hunting Date: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:07 PM Subject: [SpaceRenaissance-497] Re: IOSI - The International Open Space Initiative To: space-renaissance-initiative at googlegroups.com This seems seems a natural fit. It all looks compatible with the IOSI concepts, with the exception of the later stage manned mission proposals. I've regarded that as just a bit too ambitious for a 'crowdsourced' approach to development -at least until we have access to a second or third generation of new machine tool technology. Telerobotics could certainly help a fast-track short duration manned mission by pre-deploying temporary outpost facilities, reducing their delivery costs (and affording redundancy), and assembling transorbital spacecraft on-orbit using modest scale unmanned launch systems. (as long as you aren't carrying human beings, you don't need a man-rated launch vehicle to loft man-rated hardware, so there's some savings even if you can't go so far as to exploit low-reliability launch logistics due to the higher value of the payload) The 'beamship' concept proposed as the transport for telerobotic settlement hardware (so called because its architecture is based on a single truss beam assembled on-orbit that serves as the primary structure for the vessel) also offers a lower cost approach to manned transorbital vessel design based on the use of large but simple Transhab hull modules or what I call 'EvoHab' hulls that decouple pressure hull and shielding by using a space frame to support modular shield panels enclosing pneumatic hull skins that can be packed in very small packages and easily replaced as a habitat structurally evolves. This same approach is suited to surface habitat construction and allows robotic pre-assembly, though without local industry to manufacture its parts it's more suited to small temporary shelters. By the way, I've gotten some passive interest for the IOSI concept from the start-up TV network OWL TV (Other Worlds and Lands) which has interest in the concept of a documentary-style reality show following the activities of developer participants and annual conventions. If they're interested in pursuing this, it could be a way to get sponsorship to support initial media and mock-up development while helping attract more philanthropic support. What I imagine is an initial PR effort using a mobile exhibit intended to draw attention to the program web site. I've been suggesting a portable exhibit based on a presentation video (also used on the web site), a walk-through labyrinth display based on trade show banner stands showcasing graphic visualizations (I've corresponded with Aldo Spadoni and hope he might be interested in doing this artwork if there are sponsors for it), a semi-working miniature model mockup of a settlement (with a few simple RC robots for visitors to control. Might be a good tie-in for MiniSpaceWorld), and perhaps a mockup manned settlement structure - based on T-slot construction like that of the Jeriko House company (I wrote for their web site and am friendly with their owner so they might be willing to participate)- accompanying the model settlement as an enclosure. This PR work would not only get the ball rolling with the program itself but be used as a way to pick program participants to follow for the TV show, with the 'story' based on their efforts to get hardware developed to demonstrate at annual IOSI conventions. This prospect of appearing in a TV show could be a good added motivator for early participation in the program -both for developers as well as philanthropists. Eric Hunting erichunting at gmail.com On Jul 28, 2009, at 8:14 AM, charles_radley wrote: > > Dear SRI friends, > > Perhaps there is opportunity for the SRI (Space Renaissance > Initiative) OSI (Open Space Initiative) to collaborate with OpenLuna. > Moon Society is a supporter of SRI. > > Best regards, Charles Radley - VP Moon Society. > > http://openluna.org/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Space Renaissance Initiative" group. To post to this group, send email to space-renaissance-initiative at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to space-renaissance-initiative+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/space-renaissance-initiative?hl=en?hl=en Also keep upgraded on http://www.spacerenaissance.org/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From spike66 at att.net Tue Aug 4 04:23:01 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:23:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> References: <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com><6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> Message-ID: Damien Sullivan wrote: > Raise fossil carbon taxes high enough and the... ...government gets thrown out on their asses. As they should. spike From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 4 05:34:46 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 01:34:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com><1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Me: >> Let me ask you something, if the world's temperature increases >> will that create more clouds or fewer clouds? "Alfio Puglisi" > We don't know. Then how in hell do you have the balls to tell millions of poor people that they must starve to death on the basis of these half baked climate models? The computer models of sub prime mortgages were models of precision in comparison. > I find it interesting that you take the few unknowns in the models and use > them to invalidate the entire story. It only takes one unknown, even one far less significant than the total amount energy driving the climate regulated by clouds, to make climate models utter nonsense. And yet you expect billions of people to quite literally bet their life on this crap! John K Clark From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 06:58:35 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:58:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> Message-ID: On 8/4/09, John K Clark wrote: > Fuck the IPCC! If you're really serious about this, and I mean serious, > you're going to have to abandon fossil fuels and that means condemning > millions to death and billions to poverty. And all the ethanol alcohol and > wind farm fantasies in the world won't change that. I'm not happy about it, > I wish there were a alternative, but there isn't, and raging against the > inevitable is stupid. > > Like it or not the world runs on fossil fuels. Take that away then the > world won't run. If the world doesn't run then people are going to die. Lots > and lots and lots and lots of people. That's when the obscene term "Mega > Death" would come into its own. > Sorry to interrupt when you're in full flow, but your comment is pretty much irrelevant to what to do about global warming. Fossil fuels are running out. We have to face the problem of doing without fossil fuels anyway. And fossil fuel running out (and becoming very expensive) seems likely to happen quicker than global warming. Quote: The IEA estimates that the decline in oil production in existing fields is now running at 6.7 per cent a year compared to the 3.7 per cent decline it had estimated in 2007, which it now acknowledges to be wrong. --------- BillK From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 08:14:57 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:14:57 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908040114h15d07170vb4910442bdafec41@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 1:44 AM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> Last century: [sea level rise] 7 inches/century > > I said 6 inches/century, but I won't fight you over that last inch; after > all it's in my favor. The point was that you asserted a continuity between post-glacial sea level rise, and current sea level rise. I have shown you that post-glacial sea rise stopped 6,000 years ago, so that the current rise can't be attributed to ice age leftovers. > Last 20 years: ?10 inches/century > > So in the last 20 years the sea has risen 10 inches a century. Huh? It's like saying that in the last 20 minutes you have been going at 100 miles per hour. >> Stop this hyperbole. The IPCC quantified the additional expense in energy >> investment at max $2T over 25 years > > Fuck the IPCC! If you're really serious about this, and I mean serious, > you're going to have to abandon fossil fuels and that means condemning > millions to death and billions to poverty. I believe we are talking about different things. 1) checking whether global warming is happening, and why, is a purely scientific issue. 2) How to avoid it, and before that, whether avoiding it is desiderable or not, is a policy issue. I see the two things as entirely separate. I don't see how discussing 1), with the evental result that global warming is real, means I am "condeming" people. We are not entering issue 2): > And all the ethanol alcohol and Ethanol alcohol is a delusion. If you are "really serious" you don't even mention it. > wind farm fantasies Wind energy instead can be a major player. > in the world won't change that. I'm not happy about it, > I wish there were a alternative, but there isn't, and raging against the > inevitable is stupid. That's circular logic: as long as you believe it's "inevitable", you'll reject any possible alternative as "fantasies". >> what is your estimate of people starving to death or >> remaining in poverty if we don't take action? > > Like it or not the world runs on fossil fuels. Take that away then the world > won't run. > If the world doesn't run then people are going to die. Lots and > lots and lots and lots of people. That's when the obscene term "Mega Death" > would come into its own. > > I have no doubt that you are a good person and I have no doubt you wish the > very best for the world, but wishing does not make it so. I think you are again mixing the two issues: my good or bad intentions and my wishes have nothing to do with issue 1). I understood that your stance until now was "it's not happening" - is that incorrect? > Good intentions are not enough; you've got to be smart. I agree with your last sentence. If global warming will be as bad as expected, the problem will indeed be difficult to solve. But your waving of "millions" and "billions" of deaths and starving people without good evidence, and without comparisons with alternate scenarios, don't help. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 08:22:33 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:22:33 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:34 AM, John K Clark wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Let me ask you something, if the ?world's temperature increases >>> will that create more clouds or fewer clouds? > > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> We don't know. > > Then how in hell do you have the balls to tell millions of poor people that > they must starve to death on the basis of these half baked climate models? > The computer models of sub prime mortgages were models of precision in > comparison. Because all known physics tells us that, if you put enough CO2 in the atmosphere, global warming will result. And we are seeing a clear rise in temperature. And we know that the current rise in CO2 and temperature would be a *vertical line* on any climate graph of the known Earth history, unlike anything we have seen before. Somehow the clouds have failed to materialize to save the situation. >> I find it interesting that you take the few unknowns in the models and use >> them to invalidate the entire story. > > It only takes one unknown, even one far less significant than the total > amount energy driving the climate regulated by clouds, to make climate > models utter nonsense. Can you show this numerically? If you can show, quantitatively, that one or more of the current unknowns in the models are enough to mask the cumulative (in the time axis) effect of CO2, water wapor and other GHGs, you will have a point, but not yet. > And yet you expect billions of people to quite > literally bet their life on this crap! And you still have to justify your "millions and billions" claim. Alfio From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 4 16:06:15 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:06:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer><4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com><6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> <4902d9990908040114h15d07170vb4910442bdafec41@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4EB9F0680F0346CB98312FCA8E270525@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > Wind energy instead can be a major player. Wind energy will never be more than a bit player, you're going to have to find something one hell of a lot better than that if you plan to get rid of fossil fuels. > I understood that your stance until now was "it's not happening" [global > warming] - is that incorrect? I think it would be more accurate to say I don't care very much if it's happening or not. I say this for 3 reasons: 1) Even if it is happening global warming would probably be a good thing on the whole. 2) Even if I'm wrong about the above with current technology there is nothing we can do about it so there is no point obsessing over it. 3) If in a century or two we find that it is turning into a serious problem we can deal with it then when our box of tools will be far more powerful than it is now. > your waving of "millions" and "billions" of deaths and starving people > without good evidence Exactly what sort of evidence would satisfy you? If you're serious about this then the first thing you're going to have to do is get China to stop using coal, a substance much vilified but a substance that has lifted 400 million people out of poverty in the last 20 years. Then you're going to have to turn off all the other fossil fuels that drive our world. To maintain that such a huge disruption of human affairs could happen without Mega Death is foolish. John K Clark From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Aug 4 16:42:17 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:42:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] did the multiverse just get thinner? Message-ID: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Giant Particle Collider Fizzles By DENNIS OVERBYE Has anyone yet commented on the (extremely implausible) possibility that the LHC *must* create a world-killing black hole--or wormhole or the like--in the vast majority of adjacent or superposed worlds where a series of absurd accidents and coincidences *hasn't* stopped the machine from being activated? And since we're still here, it's precisely because our world is one of the few with the serious breakdowns... If this crazy idea catches on, there'll be even more fearful voices clamoring to have the thing smashed. Then again, it could even be true. Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12970 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 4 16:22:45 2009 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:22:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It's interesting how much argument on climate change is based on looking at data, trying to see the developing trends, and often a graph demonstrating an upward curve is used to illustrate the point for global warming, and downward curves on sunspots used to argue for global cooling. This reminds me of arguments used regarding the singularity - The existence of Moore's law is used to draw an exponential graph showing accelerating processing power. Another graph is used to show the pace of human technological progress (and by picking points of progress suitably, an accelerating rate of progress is shown). Accelerating computing power + accelerating gadget development is used to demonstrate the possibility of ever-accelerating technological change leading to a colossal rate of change where a singularity occurs and we can only guess at what lies beyond. On the other hand, you could draw graphs picking different points and argue the pace of change is not so rapid (such as Max More's concept of "The Surge" if progress is not exponential) or even follow Mike Darwin's idea of looking at graphs of medical developments (if less drugs and medical devices are being presented to the FDA, guardians of the most lucrative healthcare market on earth, then is biomedical progress slowing?). Like the climate change arguments of "but you're assuming CO2 is the important factor", it can be argued "but you're assuming raw processing power is the important factor in developing artificial general intelligence". It's interesting to think about how we debate the facts with each other to form our own theories of the future, and the resulting visions. People have been ignoring futurists or playing up their theories as scare stories for a long time - is there a way we can make transhuman ideas fare slightly better than those of past future-gazers? Tom From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 17:09:04 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:09:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4EB9F0680F0346CB98312FCA8E270525@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> <4902d9990908040114h15d07170vb4910442bdafec41@mail.gmail.com> <4EB9F0680F0346CB98312FCA8E270525@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908041009x1eacc1ech31efabd572f09d36@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:06 PM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> Wind energy instead can be a major player. > > Wind energy will never be more than a bit player, you're going to have to > find something one hell of a lot better than that if you plan to get rid of > fossil fuels. You don't need something that will give you a 100% solution. For "major player" I mean something comparable to hydro, or nuclear, that is, something capable of supplying a good fraction of the total electricity generation. Wind energy recent growth has been impressive (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power#Wind power usage ). It is now making sizable power generation in small countries, and has now appearing on big nations' charts. Currently, the biggest problem with wind farms is overloading: when there's too much wind, they have to shut down the farm because either the grid can't take it, or the other plants can't power down fast enough. But if you have a lot of storage at hand that can adsorb the power surge, like, say, some tens of millions of parked electric cars, this can play nicely. Various efforts, collectively called "smart grids", are going in this direction. >> I understood that your stance until now was "it's not happening" [global >> >> warming] - is that incorrect? > > I think it would be more accurate to say I don't care very much if it's > happening or not. I say this for 3 reasons: > > 1) Even if it is happening global warming would probably be a good thing on > the whole. > > 2) Even if I'm wrong about the above with current technology there is > nothing we can do about it so there is no point obsessing over it. > > 3) If in a century or two we find that it is turning into a serious problem > we can deal with it then when our box of tools will be far more powerful > than it is now. Thanks for the explanation. While I disagree with you on point 1), I'm reaching similar conclusions on point 2) - for different reasons. I don't really think it's a problem of technology, just old-fashioned market economics and psychology. >> your waving of "millions" and "billions" of deaths and starving people >> without good evidence > > Exactly what sort of evidence would satisfy you? If you're serious about > this then the first thing you're going to have to do is get China to stop > using coal, a substance much vilified but a substance that has lifted 400 > million people out of poverty in the last 20 years. China is going to face some "interesting" years - their water supply from the Himalayas is going to decrease a lot, and they know it. They are currently in tight negotiations with the West over CO2 targets. BTW, China is among the world leaders in wind energy and its recent growth is just behind the US, which is up to now the biggest player. > Then you're going to have to turn off all the other fossil fuels that drive our world. Except for coal, the rest of the fossil fuels will take care of themselves. Here is a list of the oil-producing countries already past peak based on data from British Petroleum: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5576 Notice how even Saudi Arabia is in uncertain waters. Alfio From painlord2k at libero.it Tue Aug 4 19:01:47 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:01:47 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> Message-ID: <4A78859B.9040405@libero.it> spike ha scritto: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of >> Mirco Romanato >> ... >>> Sorry, I meant 0.017?C/year obviously! >> Do you know that people, in the '70s were scared by global chilling?... >> Mirco > > Mirco, whaddya mean in the 70s? I worry about global cooling now. The > sunspot count is so low there is a reasonable possibility we could be going > into another Dalton minimum, which would whoop our species bigtime, we being > indigenous to Africa but having spread all over the globe. Looks to me like > we have *plenty* of margin to get warmer on this planet, but very little > tolerance for cooler. Well, we can adapt to it. We did before, we can do again. I suppose this will not happen as in "The Day After Tomorrow" (the most hilarious movies I watched in the last few years). The hysteria I was writing about is this: http://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/climate-change-alarmism-timelin/ http://butnowyouknow.wordpress.com/those-who-fail-to-learn-from-history/climate-change-timeline/ It appear this is nothing new, apart for the clueless. Mirco From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Aug 4 19:06:24 2009 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:06:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <468EEF57C84B4A3B8BE9ABA1B48777D6@MyComputer> References: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> <468EEF57C84B4A3B8BE9ABA1B48777D6@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20090804190624.GA30505@ofb.net> On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:06:00AM -0400, John K Clark wrote: > "Damien Sullivan" > >> Funny how people who believe in nanotech and AI and such have >> trouble with closer and more plausible visions. Like >> nuclear/solar/geothermal providing the basic power, and liquid >> fuels being synthesized from biomass > > Help me out, what's funny about that? Ideas like Nanotech and AI are > entirely logical and smart as hell. Other concepts, like synthesizing > ethanol alcohol for fuel from a substance called "corn" that That is stupid, but I didn't say anything about corn, did I? That's your strawman. I said from biomass or atmospheric CO2 (which you cut off). Certain applications like liquid fuels as a local energy source, but nothing stops us from synthesizing it from other energy sources. All the chemical steps are known factors, though not necessarily mass-industrialized yet due to lack of need. -xx- Damien X-) From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Aug 4 19:07:47 2009 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:07:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 09:23:01PM -0700, spike wrote: > > Damien Sullivan wrote: > > > Raise fossil carbon taxes high enough and the... > > ...government gets thrown out on their asses. As they should. spike "Polluter pays" isn't a principle in your world, I guess. Pollution taxes could be redistributed per capita, so as to be revenue-neutral to the government and to the average consumer, but increasing incentives for savings (e.g. saving $6/gallon instead of $2). Market forces at work. -xx- Damien X-) From jonkc at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 4 19:36:29 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:36:29 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com><1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer><4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > all known physics tells us that, if you put enough CO2 in the atmosphere, > global warming will result. If it were that simple making good climate models would be easy. It isn't. During the late Ordovician period, 450 million years ago, there was a huge amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, about 4400 ppm verses 380 today, and yet the world was in the grip of a severe ice age. > we are seeing a clear rise in temperature. It hasn't been very clear during the last decade! > we know that the current rise in CO2 and temperature would be a > *vertical line* on any climate graph of the known Earth history, > unlike anything we have seen before. That is simply untrue. During the last 600 million years the atmosphere has almost always had far more CO2 than now, abut 3000 ppm on average. The only exception was a period that lasted from 315 million years ago to 270 where there was about the same amount of CO2 as we have now. The temperature was about the same then as it is now too, and during the late Ordovician that I mentioned before it was much colder, but other than a few very brief ice ages during the last few million years the temperature has always been warmer than now, or at least during the last 600 million years it has. > Can you show this numerically? If you can show, quantitatively, that one > or more of the current unknowns in the models are enough to mask the > cumulative (in the time axis) effect of CO2, water wapor and other > GHGs, you will have a point, but not yet. Can you show me a climate model that has accurately predicted anything? These things have no track record but you expect us to stake our lives on them. > Somehow the clouds have failed to materialize to save the situation. I'm not saying clouds are going to save us, for all I know they could make things worse, but I am saying that love them or hate them clouds are vitally important to climate. So how much confidence can you have in a computer model that doesn't even try to deal with them? John K Clark From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 20:25:23 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:25:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:36 PM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> all known physics tells us that, if you put enough CO2 in the atmosphere, >> global warming will result. > > If it were that simple making good climate models would be easy. It isn't. > During the late Ordovician period, 450 million years ago, there was a huge > amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, about 4400 ppm verses 380 today, and yet > the world was in the grip of a severe ice age. I should have added "all other things being equal". 450 millions years ago conditions where different enough that you are speaking of another Earth. And you forgot to mention that the ice age was triggered by a rapid reduction of CO2 from 7000 to 4000 ppm. Sure the absolute level was high, but the change and the rate of change is what matters. By the way, you seem to have a lot of faith in what science says about a period 450 millions years ago, for which scraps of evidence are far and between, and things are derived by long chains of reasoning. Instead you don't believe models based on reliable historical records, ground and satellite measurements, and direct observation, for a mere 100 years onward. Peculiar logic yours. >> ?we are seeing a clear rise in temperature. > > It hasn't been very clear during the last decade! I have already shown, numerically, why it is so. You haven't brought any new arguments. >> we know that the current rise in CO2 and temperature would be a >> *vertical line* on any climate graph of the known Earth history, >> unlike anything we have seen before. > > That is simply untrue. During the last 600 million years the atmosphere has > almost always had far more CO2 than now, abut 3000 ppm on average. The only > exception was a period that lasted from 315 million years ago to 270 where > there was about the same amount of CO2 as we have now. The temperature was > about the same then as it is now too, and during the late Ordovician that I > mentioned before it was much colder, but other than a few very brief ice > ages during the last few million years the temperature has always been > warmer than now, or at least during the last 600 million years it has. Ah, now we go to 600 million years. In the next post you'll talk about the CO2 level of the solar system's precursor nebula? :-) The vertical line description is another reference to the speed of the change, an argument that you seem unable to grasp from the kind of rebuttals you are making. Who cares what the CO2 level was 600 million years ago? A planet with a weaker Sun, a short day, different continents and no land plants or animal! Are you seriously comparing that world with our present times? >> Can you show this numerically? If you can show, quantitatively, that one >> or more of the current unknowns in the models are enough to mask the >> cumulative (in the time axis) effect of CO2, water wapor and other >> GHGs, you will have a point, but not yet. > > Can you show me a climate model that has accurately predicted anything? > These things have no track record but you expect us to stake our lives on > them. Two I get from memory: - Hansen et al. 1988 prediction, verified in 1996, refenced some posts ago: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2006/Hansen_etal_1.html - Hansen et al 1992 predictions about the climatic effects of the then-recent Pinatubo eruption - for this i don't have a link handy. >> Somehow the clouds have failed to materialize to save the situation. > > I'm not saying clouds are going to save us, for all I know they could make > things worse, But you consistently talk like they'll make things better than expected. Your constant minimization of the models quality speaks of a fundamental misunderstanding of what they are. I can't do much better than quote Gavin Schmidt in a realclimate blog post. From http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/11/bbc-contrarian-top-10 : " There is a world of difference between acknowledging that models are imperfect (which they are) and claiming that they are fundamentally unreliable without mentioning what is being talked about. Do models reliably match the cooling during subsequent to the Pinatubo eruption? Yes. Do they reliably predict a northward shift in tropical rain bands during the mid-Holocene? Yes. Do they predict last glacial climates as cold as observed based on their included physics? Yes. etc. etc. Do they reliably project rainfall changes in the New York in 20 years time - probably not. Thus statements that are absent of nuance as in the 'sceptic' point put forward by Singer are indeed false, and not just a matter of opinion. What is being implicitly asserted is that modelling is a dangerous waste of time, rather than the fundamental way in which our theories of climate and climate change can be quantified and evaluated." Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 20:38:36 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:38:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4A78859B.9040405@libero.it> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4E5E3B65D4AB4499A65466E43CCAB729@spike> <4A78859B.9040405@libero.it> Message-ID: <4902d9990908041338y15323ca3gc3c12642930868c3@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Mirco Romanato wrote: > > The hysteria I was writing about is this: > http://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/climate-change-alarmism-timelin/ > http://butnowyouknow.wordpress.com/those-who-fail-to-learn-from-history/climate-change-timeline/ Your two lists are revealing! To understand them, note first that the introductory text is incorrect. They both start saying: "climate ?scientists have been claiming....", while instead collecting headlines mostly from popular newspapers. They do switch between doom predictions of cooling and warming, and are as such a good example of the "hysteria" you describe. But, they mix many citations from newspapers with a few citations from scientific journals.and official organizations. Guess what, all the scientific citations are on the warming side! Except for a single quote from New Scientists, all the cooling/warming switches and exaggerated warnings were made by newspapers and popular press, not scientific research. > It appear this is nothing new, apart for the clueless. The moral from your "hysteria" lists: don't use newspapers as a guide in scientific matters, and especially to decide how much clue you, or others, have. Alfio From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 4 22:48:29 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 17:48:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Re: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? In-Reply-To: <4A78B8FA.7050602@kurtz-fernhout.com> References: <28c9b9bd-7acf-40ca-85e9-1e84ff3b6a24@r2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <6ee2332b0908030656o506c7ee9q58ab51e1f1ee1d98@mail.gmail.com> <55ad6af70908031052q4647efbbv85c0355a725e3eed@mail.gmail.com> <6ee2332b0908031121q35966229o9b5396bfb3a14402@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e0908031303p50be76d6x28d3dcb474e715a3@mail.gmail.com> <6ee2332b0908031405l40372d76w6abfeaba642e7fcd@mail.gmail.com> <4A776934.6080505@kurtz-fernhout.com> <6ee2332b0908031726t1ad40dadkf4a3cd4eaebdfd32@mail.gmail.com> <4A78B8FA.7050602@kurtz-fernhout.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908041548r713c1710l1926f66ddd237fe0@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul D. Fernhout Date: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:40 PM Subject: [Open Manufacturing] Re: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com Philippe Van Nedervelde wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Paul D. Fernhout < > pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote: > >> Philippe Van Nedervelde wrote: >>> Why would future-Apple and future-BMW still go to the trouble and expense >> of >>> designing products? How would they be appropriately (by their >>> standards) rewarded for their efforts and investments? >> Why would we need such companies anymore in such an abundant future? > > > Why bring up *need*? ?These companies create products millions of people > *want*. There's a difference. > > Future people will only nanofacture objects they really *need*? That misreads my intent. I asked why do we need the *companies*? Not why do we need or want the products that companies often make? It is like electricity in a blackout. When the power fails, you realize you don't really need *electricity* so much as you need the things you use electricity to help supply, like light, heat, water, sewage disposal, cooling food, heating food, and so on. So, why do we need companies to supply our electricity, :-) instead of just printing out solar panels ourselves? Panes designed by Bryan and friends, or panels designed by non-profits using government grants? There are other ways to get things done besides companies. So, why focus on keeping companies around? People can collaborate through the internet and/or at local techshops. OK, you'll suggest it takes a lot of money... Well, for what exactly? Where does the money go to? Salaries so people have time to innovate? But what of hobbyists? Big equipment like oil refineries? But what of nanotech or DIYBio to do things on the tabletop that used to take gargantuan chemical processing plants? Raw materials? But what about a nanotech or biotech system that can take in seawater or dirt? And so on. So, please be specific about what companies are supplying that is so essential in an age of nanotech, biotech, networked computing, and hobbyists with spare time? > >> What is really their primary purpose even now? What is their justification? > > > Go ask their shareholders and their millions of apparently not all that > dissatisfied customers. > > [...] Might the customers be more satisfied in other ways? Look at all the people now getting video from youtube instead of the major networks. Or people listening to truly free indy music instead of major label music. As for shareholders, "money is a sign of poverty". Why do people want to be shareholders? Well, there is a whole bunch of economic assumptions there becoming less and less valid. See for example my recent post on the p2p list about why millionaires might want to support a basic income: ? "[p2p-research] Basic income from a millionaire's perspective?" http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-August/003949.html >> Why could not a future Bryan and friends, brainboosted, vastly networked, >> and in a good mood, not just give us all a free design for any cool stuff? > > > ?You could'n find a bigger fan for generic meds, Project Gutenberg and a > cornucopia of free designs for essential, useful and > not-so-useful-but-still-fun-and-cool for future people to crank out with > their Personal Nanofactory, but *any* cool stuff? > > Including an unauthorized copy of a design that took significant time, > effort and other resources from a group of people who rightfully expect to > be rewarded for their design efforts? Authorized by whom? Why is authorization needed? What is the purpose? What does significant mean in a US$60 trillion global economy? Or where tens of trillions of dollars will be flowing into charities over the next few decades? A billion dollars is about 0.001% of the global economy. You're telling me we need to organize our whole economy a certain way so a few people can get a return on a billion dollar investment? Why? Isn't this a flea wagging a tail wagging a dog? Why organize a society that way, so it is run by the fleas? Why are these people not giving freely of their resources? Are they scared of scarcity? But are they creating that very scarcity by their fear these days? Why do people "rightfully expect to be rewarded" when reward is often no motivator for creative work? See: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/motivation.html And by what "right"? Copyright? But that bargain has been broken. Patent rights? But maybe those are too long for our current age. How is it "their" design effort when they just added a little to the commons, and others want to build on top of what was just added? Is any value added worth it compared to the chilling effects of monopolies on ideas and expressions? ? "Center for the Study of the Public Domain" ? http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/ Lots of interwoven assumptions. > I like Michael's CrunchPads and will likely pick onr or more up. > > Will he freely publish *all* (needed and requested) details re how he did > this to the point of making it really kid-easy to go do the exact same thing > and compete with his CrunchPads... and possibly beat him at it? Don't know what he is publishing. But others might. It is just to show how much one person can do these days as opposed to a "company". --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group. To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Tue Aug 4 18:10:20 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:10:20 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph In-Reply-To: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20090804181020.Y24QH.368214.root@hrndva-web20-z01> This is one of my 'little red buttons' about transhumanism and and the marketing drone approach that so many take, it simply isn't based on any science. It's clear that things can be exponential only in the short term. It is also clear that many technological advances can only go so far because they bump into a plethora of impossibility theorems. In short they ignore the 3 Laws of Thermodynamics in such a bold, and completely unchallenged way it has always boggled my mind. To borrow from Heinz Pagels; 1. You can never get ahead 2. You can never break even 3. The first two rules -always- apply The curve we need to be looking at is tanh() and not straight exponentials. The way to present that curve is from a population dynamic perspective as well. Along the horizontal is time going from 'beginning of mankind' at the origin and proceeding to the right (effectively to infinity. The vertical axis should really be a measure of the effectiveness of a given population to use technology. To be at the origin is simply stating that the populations are not using any tools, don't communicate in any long termed manner, and don't have a mechanism to record their individual experiences. In general there are three fundamental populations: - an arbitrary individual - the general population - the ruling/decision making population once these sorts of economic/political technologies are developed At the beginning all three are at the same point. As time progressed they began to separate in such a way that the technology available to each group became clearly distinct. The individual is usually at the bottom having control of the last technology. The general population has a higher technology but below the ruling/decision making group. As we approach the top of the curve the three groups begin to remerge. My suspicion is that this will impact the economic/political technologies first with regard to how people use and relate to the new technologies they have and now have the ability to develop on their own. "The street has it's own uses for technology". We can actually see the very beginning of this as we see the rise of 5th generation warfare and the 'asymmetric warfare' tactics. The truth is they're not asymmetric at all with regard to availability, only with regard to population size regarding who gets to use them. Another examples is the current turmoil in the agora with regard to the agalmic, intellectual property in particular. For many centuries (but remember not that many) the party line has been that we must protect the inventions and products of certain individuals in order to give them value. This destruction of the artificial value placed on the agalmic will cause a fundamental shift in the value of human thought and production. It will reduce it to one of equity and the technology will allow artificial structures to be identified and frustrated at earlier and earlier times. The end result is that while nobody will go hungy, everybody will have to produce for themselves in the local community to obtain value. A sort of ultimate think globally, act locally effect. Value will return to actually solving your neighbors problems rather than marketing solutions to somebody elses neighbors. The plethora of ethical and philosophical views we have are only going to increase as time goes by. Because of the organic social perspective (ie village) of individuals and the clear incompatibility of some of these views ("Why can't we all just get along" is dead) leads to another observation. That people will create zaibatsu/arcologies based around particular perspectives and not resource geography. The most obvious question is why they won't destroy each other, and the answer is that because the level of available technology is equal and the potential to keep secrets for a significant time (ie sufficient to obtain tactical if not strategic advantage from game theoretic perspective) is nil. What is the likely outcome of two groups who can control their immediate resources via nanotech and communications architectures at the atomic level? The parity leads to stalemate and isolation unless the parties as a group want to commit suicide. Another aspect, with regard to how does one predict specific characteristics and possibly even short term events, is currently almost unstudied, except for government/economic sponsored groups. One good example is Bruce Bueno De Mequita's work. This sort of analysis has been called Cliology after the Muse for history Clio. Candidate - Fundamental Theorems of Cliology These are candidates only, they are intended to foster focused discussion. Consider them incomplete both within individual suppositions as well as the complete set as a whole. Cliology is the study of history. However, it is more analytical and predictive than what one normally considers history. It is distinct (at least in my mind) from other studies like Asimov's Psychohistory because it is not as cosmological in scope. There is also the distinction of 'scale of resolution'. Psychohistory postulates that it may be possible to predict future events to the point of detailing specifics about individuals who will arise as a consequence of these formative forces. Cliology approaches the situation more as statistical mechanical and stochastic in nature. Fundamental Theorem of Cliology Who get's to make the choices? What are the permissible choices? The first two are auto-catalytic The study of what decissions were or weren't made and why, both with respect to individual as well as larger scale motivations is critical to understanding a society in a particular time scale Understanding the ecology and environs of a society is critical to understanding social statics and dynamics Cliometric Uncertainty Principle It is not possible to predict with any degree of accuracy or certainty the presence or actions of future events at the level of the individual. Because of the interplay of a multitude of forces the 'standard model' of Cliology is somewhat akin to a 'gas' model. In this case this means that we can predict 'averages' and 'trends' of potential behaviour based upon the characteristics of the individuals taken (only) in large groups. Definition of Society The cornerstones of any society are toleration self-defence A set of rules, codified or not, and expectations, expressed or not, which regulate both the individual and inter-personal activities of same Societies may be radically different in content and yet share the same geography The statics and dynamics of a society are governed by the physics of reality and the psychology of the individual (and it's absolute range) The expectations of societies can be in direct opposition Violence does not ensue from opposition but from lack of toleration of opposition This applies to all levels of societies and seems to be psychology independent (in other words, all life seems to follow it) As a result, stability can be looked upon as a measure of tolerance Hypothesis: With respect to the last item above, does this mean that societies which are most stable are the ones which tolerate the most? Can the inverse be said, that intolerant societies tend, statistically at least, to last a shorter period of time? Fundamental Axiom of Government Government is technology The bounding constraints are: Psychology Resources Environment/Ecology Definition of 'crime' Any act which harms a person, their property, or breaks a public trust without consent What is a 'public trust'? A contract entered voluntarily (at the point one questions the compliance but complies they have consented - no expectation of continued consent is implied) to provide service to the community or use a public resource What is a 'public resource'? A resource which is common to all and is required for basic individual survival or social operations Fundamental Axiom of Law The codification of social rules, commonly called 'rule of law', is an extension of the right to self-defence A defining characteristic of any society is to whom the 'right' falls to (ie some mix of individual or group) A fundamental defining character is whether the rights of society extend from the individual, or rather the rights of the individual stem from the population Definition of Civil Liberty The ability to make 'a choice' with respect to individual or classes of decisions This is the primary defining character of any human society or relationship Definition of Derivation There is an observable imbalance in the definitions of civil liberty and where they come from. A 'society' is a collection of individuals, but an individual is self-supporting. In other words you can take 'society' away from 'people', but you can't take 'people' away from 'society'. When one speaks of the 'good of society' one must also, as a consequence, speak of the 'good of the individual'. It follows logically that to maximize one requires maximizing the other. Society may not be considered succesful if its individuals are unsatisfied. Hypothesis: Can a correlation between societal longevity and the relative importance of rights derivation be drawn? What other factors are important (eg freedom to associate)? Definition of Causal Effect When one speaks of human societies you are faced with a multitude of potential decisions and effects. One observation is that simply because something works doesn't mean it is the best solution. People will often impliment sub-optimal solutions, sometimes to their greater detriment, because of psychological drives. With respect to human psychology, our societies will be governed more by how one feels it should work than any cosmological input (eg law of physics). People will tend to select choices related to how it 'should' work even when faced with strong arguments to the contrary. Definition of Cliological Metric Spaces Metric spaces with respect to studying societies are complicated and multi-valued. They contain a variety of metric scales (eg binary v discrete v linear) whose point of interest may itself be a metric space. The mathematical and economic concept of 'rational' is suspect because it fails to take into account psychology and environmental factors of indirect affect. Different agents faced with identical situations may choose different solutions. Two 'rational' agents reviewing the same data may come to radically different (even opposed) views based on issues other than strict fact. There is no one 'right way'. Because of the relativity of right and wrong all considerations must make reference to the statistical nature of the actors. A fundamental concept of Cliology is the statistical mechanical character of human societies. In contrast to many other sciences (eg economics) inter-actions between players is considered a given. Each actor does not act in isolation to their community. Each agent in a model should be considered a multi-dimensional data structure. Different agents may have different internal structures and interfaces. Any interaction between one set of agent characteristics and another agents set must follow defined conversion algorithms. These algorithms are not necessarily loss-less or available (ie some agents can't talk to other agents because they don't have a communications process). Expect behaviours to be self-similar. Central Position of Graph Theory to Cliology Because of the dependencies of one agent on others the concepts of graph theory are important for building a basic description of any society. It is the prime mechanism to demonstrate dependency and weighting. It's compatible with the cellular automaton model of individual agents without considerations or dependencies upon the particular models for those agents. The theory of 'small world networks' or '6 DoF - aka Kevin Bacon game' is critical to understanding the higher level exchanges as well as the analysis of emergent behaviours. The Cliological Cosmological Space - The Central Spaces Axiom The present and future has a dependency on the past. All global models must have a time axis. There is a homogenous and isomorphic metric space we all live in, a shared cosmos. This should be the fundamental space for cliological studies. It automatically allows easy inclusion of almost all other human studies as components of a larger model. The sorts of tools used for GIS (eg location, component, value) are of critical importance to build models of context and ecology. It is important to always keep the seperation between psychology and ecology primary in ones mind. This seperation in effect creates two metric spaces (ie ecological and psychological) connected through common labels (ie tags to agent data spaces). Observation On Available Societal Information Since the mid-1990's it has become possible to not only obtain large amounts of detailed or fine-grained information about individuals, but also to apply pattern matching, signature analysis, and traffic analysis to it. The critical factor in this was the growth of computers and networks of same. Currently the groups who have the access are government and financial institutions acting through combining organizations like FINCEN. The primary justification for this is crime enforcement (re tolerance of opposition). There is considerable concern that such solitary access will have a negative impact on the stability of the society. In particular with regards the concepts of 'democracy', 'personal liberty' and 'privacy'. Note: these terms and related terms need to be better defined within this framework, a future effort. >From a cliological perspective this represents a data set of sufficient size and detail to corrolate with GIS and population statistics in a meaningful way. ---- Tom Nowell wrote: > This reminds me of arguments used regarding the singularity - The existence of Moore's law is used to draw an exponential graph showing accelerating processing > power. Another graph is used to show the pace of human technological progress (and by picking points of progress suitably, an accelerating rate of progress is shown). > Accelerating computing power + accelerating gadget development is used to demonstrate the possibility of ever-accelerating technological change leading to a colossal > rate of change where a singularity occurs and we can only guess at what lies beyond. > On the other hand, you could draw graphs picking different points and argue the pace of change is not so rapid (such as Max More's concept of "The Surge" if progress > is not exponential) or even follow Mike Darwin's idea of looking at graphs of medical developments (if less drugs and medical devices are being presented to the FDA, > guardians of the most lucrative healthcare market on earth, then is biomedical progress slowing?). Like the climate change arguments of "but you're assuming CO2 is > the important factor", it can be argued "but you're assuming raw processing power is the important factor in developing artificial general intelligence". Now this certainly doesn't address all aspects and one important one is the psychology of the individual and the populations they participate in. One defining characteristic of human psychology has to do with transcendence. Humanity as a whole, and for the vast majority of individuals, struggle to find a description of their existence that is beyond them. This is probably the biggest ideological hurdle we as a race, and as individuals, have to face. As the available 'wiggle room' between what we see and think we see, and what we know through empirical evidence widens we'll see many belief systems go away. An important question is what will replace them? I'll assume that one defining character is the abandonment of transcendence. Are there any such examples, however crude, extant now? Pantheism (and I don't mean Scientific Pantheism or any of the marketing droid remakes of same out there). > 4-22-08 > The Edge: Breaking the Galilean Spell (Stuart A. Kauffman) > This article makes some excellent points and I'm currently reviewing it for concept inclusion and rebutt. We are part of Nature as a whole whose order we follow. Spinoza, 1673 What is Pantheism? Pantheism is the belief that everything is divine, that God is not seperate but totaly indentified with the Cosmos. It is a doctrine that holds God exists not as a person or personality; but is manifested in the material cosmos, including man and every other natural object. It further refutes the potential of transcendence and super-natural possibilities. It views such beliefs as a result of the psychology of the observer and not any sort of absolute representation of nature and its interactions. It is the understanding that the Cosmos has two components, Physics and Psychology. In one sentence Pantheism can be summed up: Pantheism is the abandonment of Transcendence Some related Pantheism URL's: It should be noted that inclusion in this list does not imply agreement by the author, as in most human activity there are disagreements. Stanford Philosophy Server What is Pantheism? Another definition one might use is [Dictionary of Theories (ISBN 1-57859-045-0)]: Literally 'all-god-ism'. The view that God and the universe are identical; or that there is no transcendent God outside the universe who created it, but the universe itself is divine. Among philosophers, Baruch de Spinoza (1632-77) is as prominent exponent of such a view, and it appears also in Stoicism. The term itself was coined in 1705 by Irish writer John Toland (1670-1722). Pantheism and traditional religions and philosophies Pantheism is a very mechanistic view of reality. It doesn't hold with ghosts in the machine or other similar forces. Pantheism is at odds with all other religions. This does not mean that there are not shared concepts, but when one looks at the total picture Pantheism is clearly distinct from all other world views. This creates problems for many as they want to see it as a different shade rather than a different color. Besides the concept of transcendence there is the concept of peace. All religions promise peace and tranquility if the practitioner only tries hard enough, and in the right way. There is no peace to be had, the cosmos is a fundamentaly violent place. Struggle is inherent in existance be it a rock, a rabbit, or a person. It is only the nature of the struggle that is different. A Pantheist understands that it is their anthropocentricism and the limits of their psychology that colors their interpretation of the Cosmos. To borrow an observation from Quantum Physics, The Cosmos is observer dependent. Fundamentally pantheism recognizes that all beliefs are faith. That concepts such as absolute truth don't exist outside of observer independant events (e.g. meteor strikes planet, kills all life). Pantheism holds that even science is itself only a religion since it is based upon a small set of beliefs which are unprovable. Science as we know it, however perfectly practiced, is colored by our psychology. It is important to recognize that this observation does not in any way decrease the utility of science in understanding the cosmos. It is also worth mentioning specifically that science is fundamentaly different than other philosophies (other than Pantheism) because it accepts , at least in principle, it's basic axioms are open to change or nullification. Unlike other religions, pantheism does not address the actual understability of the cosmos by any observer. It is a matter of individual psychology and faith. The actual degree of comprehension of the Cosmos by an individual or a group is open to interpretation. The meaning of Life, or why are we here? Pantheism does not recognize a seperation of the human experience from the remainder of the cosmos. That the universe ponders itself is fundamentaly irrelevant. Is the universe alive? Yes, so far as we define the biochemistry on this little ball of mud alive. It is a self referential, and useless, point. Is the universe intelligent, only so far as we and other lifeforms are intelligent by our definition. It is also recognized that intelligence is after all a human concept and may in fact have no validity outside of human psychology. We decide what the meaning of life is by living it. To borrow a poem from the Chinese text The Mtsao, You are What you do When it counts To add one further observation, as individuals or as a race, we seldom have any input in to when it will count. Most individuals and groups take far more credit than they are due, they underestimate and disrespect the power of chance. The Cosmos is autocatalytic The Cosmos exists because if it didn't there wouldn't be one to ponder. Even if the Cosmos as we see it today came from nothing, that nothing is still something. This problem is more likely a reflection of the emotional state and needs of the observer than a valid commentary on the character of the cosmos. Tools such as Gaian ecology or Complexity Theory are generaly well received by pantheist since, contrary to the typical western deconstructionalism, they also consider the whole system to reach understanding. One must look at both the nature of the components as well as the system in which those components exist. Emergent behavior is often not concerned with the actual mechanism of existance but rather the potential number of different states that system can take on, and how it might change from one state to another. Pantheism and Society Pantheist tend to be very literal and practical. Conformity is not their strong suite because they recognize that much of accepted canon is actualy just opinion, and in may cases there are better ways. They also tend to be active in their beliefs. If they don't do it, who will? There is no higher power to plead their case to. The point to life, if it can be said to have one, is to live. Hopefully so you can ask questions like this to pass the time between birth and death. If not then it's to stay alive long enough to procreate. This is clearly an aspect of the psychology of the observer and their mental state. The Two Ways of The One There are two ways to Pantheism. Another striking difference between Pantheism and almost all other human viewpoints. It leaves the choice up to the individual. It further conflicts with the ideas of good and evil as held by the majority. It recognizes that such concepts are relative and not absolute. The group way is to recognize the fundmamental equality of all things and conserve resources and tend toward cooperative behaviour. The individual way is to recognize the fundamental equality of all things and to use them to foster individual existence. Either are equally valid approaches, neither has a superiority over the other. In mosts situations, the individuals choices will be somewhere between these two poles. Most people find this aspect of Pantheism to be very hard to accept. People want an answer, not a choice. The choice is where one stands between the extremes of the group or the individual. It is in direct odds with human nature. Pantheist believe in the fundamental equality of all things, which stems from the belief that all things are fundamentally one, the Cosmos. Distinctions are put there by human psychology and our incomplete understanding of what is there and how it fits together. The impact of Pantheist thought on modern political and social culture is in its infancy. The abandonment of transcendence coupled with a sense of absolute equality does not bode well for the status quo. There are no women rights or gay rights, only human rights within the context of a shared belief system. If one person may do it, then any person may do it. For any healthy workable society we must recognize the fundamental nature of the human animal. The Choice must reside with the individual in all cases. Communities, governments, and authority are emergent behaviours of individuals following a varied set of goals, attempting to work in groups. Eventually we will see that the primary lesson of the 20th century is that governments and groups can't be allowed bo break eggs. It will certainly come at a price even larger than the 100+ Million who have died over the last century for no other reason than one group can't tolerate the thoughts and beliefs of another. Another observation that will eventually become apparent to the masses is that government and economics are nothing more than another sort of technology. They are not inherent in the human condition, simply a solution to a problem that was developed by our ancestors and their limited experiences. They are simply a solution to the problem of survival in a Cosmos ruled by supply and demand. This will lead to the realization that they can be abandoned for other solutions. An interesting acceptance of this is the concept of Fifth Generation Warfare. The Good and The Bad, both are Ugly Pantheism does not recognize any concept of good or bad, outside the context of the human psychology. It is this little bit of the Cosmos reflecting upon itself that provides the context. A Pantheist would not see a fundamental wrong in killing a rabbit, a human, or the entire planet. Only within the context of a society does value become to have meaning. It further observes that the question of whether it is worse to kill one or one million is fundamentaly a smoke screen. It is asked in the context of a human society and the precepts and limits that sociiety assumes and accepts. A Pantheism may come to realize that there is another solution to the problem of which side one stands on within the context of a social problem. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play the game. Pantheism and Ecology Pantheism does not foster any sort of respect or motive to preserve the ecology or environment. If one examines the cosmos we find the destruction of life on grand scales to have occurred many times. There can be no fundamental support of ecological or environmental activism outside the human psychology. It is our own hubric anthropocentricism which colors our every act. If anything the remains of one act of destruction leave resources for a new act of creation. However, it is clear that we do have a responsibility to protect our own self interests. This leads one to use resources according to one strategy or another. An individualist Pantheist would likely look at it very short term. Whereas a Pantheist more concerned with group survival would take the long, or deep time perspective. It is suspected that the deep time perspective has the least negative side effects due to the simple concept of conservationism. Divinity and Sacred For many people raised in traditional religious societies the concept of divine or sacred seem to be problematic. In truth they're pretty simple to understand from a Pantheists view. Divine means to be part of God. Since Pantheism's primary tenet that all is God there is no possible conflict. Unlike the traditional religious view no distinction between the thing being divine and God can occur since they are unity. Sacred on the other hand means to set aside for or use in religious purposes. It implies a seperation between the transcendental and the mundane. Pantheism abandons transcendence and seperatism in this context, all is unity. A Pantheist does't recognize the concept of sacred as anything but confused. One way to describe the Pantheist creedo is, If you find a sacred cow, have a bar-b-que! Pantheism and Toleration Pantheist tend to be tolerant of other belief systems and their practice so long as no coercion is encountered. Since all is one, other beliefs are accepted as possible, but not necessarily practical or even workable. We also recognize that people will try to make things work instead of admitting they wont work and finding other solutions. In cases of violence Pantheist tend toward pragmatism. Avoidance is the best strategy. The alternate is to do whatever will reduce the future occurance of this event as well as maximizing the participants, all of them if given a choice, chance of escaping from the confrontation. This of course is the group side. The individual side responce may be to nuke them until they glow, and then shoot them in the dark. No Pantheist can be a pacifist (violence is inherent in the Cosmos), some are non-violent. The distinction being whether force is used as a means to an ends, or simply in self-defense. The group Pantheist does not accept the belief that the ends justify the means (The Law of Unintended Consequences). Each action must justify itself. To try to say that some small evil justifies the greater good only tarnishes the concept of geater good. It reduces the concept from a principle to an expedient. The strict individualist Pantheist on the other hand would, in principle at least, cut your throat as soon as look at you if there were a profit to be made. Some thoughts on Intelligence It is important to realize that the intelligence refered to is not two people but two distinct races or brain morphologies. A regular table represents the totality of rules and interactions that compose the Cosmos. Each intelligence be it man, microbe, or alien from Alpha Centauri is represented by potato chip lids (a physical representation of a Venn Diagram).: Assume that the table top is the set of all possible laws and interactions that can describe the Cosmos. The lids represent the sets of laws that allow intelligence in some form or other. The questions that we'll pose are: Is the set of fundamental relations and interactions limited or infinite? Is the area of the table fixed or infinite? The author thinks they are limited. This leads to the realization that at some point know all there is to know. The question then becomes whether this is enough for us to build our own cosmos'? Is there a necessity for any two intelligences to have at least some overlap? If so, is this overlap a result of the laws of physics allowing only certain classes of intelligence? Are there fundamental physical rules for intelligence all must share? Or, is it a result of the potential that if the two intellegences don't overlap it may not be possible for them to even recognize each other as intelligent. Or, is it pure chance that an overlap occurs at all, and that intellegence can in fact be recognizable (ie symmetry breaking) irrespective of the set membership? Are there commen characteristics (ie emergent behaviors) that all intelligences share irrespective of their base set? Also, for a given intelligence set is it a requirement for that set to include self-understanding? In other words, can it be such that the set of rules that allow intelligence prohibit self-understanding at some fundamental level? Or, is it a pot-luck dinner in that one life form may be able to succesfully understand itself at the fundamental level (ie could at least in theory build itself) while another is forever going to miss the mark because it simply can't comprehend the relations? Now these same sorts of questions can be extended to the study of what 'life' is. As a result we are faced with the potential of different 'sets' of life and parallel consequences. What is the relationship between these /intelligence sets/ and the totality of member rules? Is it possible for a limited set to comprehend the entire set at least in theory? If not, then what are the limitations of any given sets boundary? How would one set explain to another set some aspect that the second set could not understand as a result of its set membership? This is another way to express Clarke's Law In regard to AI, if the set of necessary rules for intelligence are in fact fixed is it possible to embody those rules in a mechanism of a non-biological nature? These last two lead to some very hairy questions regarding the way we as humans treat animals and potentialy AI's as well as cloning. If the set is not fixed or can be embodied in non-biological systems then do we have a 'being' that is due the same respect as ourselves? Is it the intelligence or the set of rules that matter as far as moral and ethical issues are concerned? An example of faith in science The author was posed the following question, If identical oxygen atoms (at the same temperature, velocity, etc.) are fundamentally the SAME, (meaning that they could change places and we could know no difference), then information is necessarily destroyed. How can that be unless the atoms themselves are different? If they are the same they should have the same information and ability to store the same potential levels. Otherwise they are dis-similar and we are in contradiction to your assumptions. In fact, once swapped how would you determine the swap had even taken place unless they were different? Once the swap had taken place the only thing *proving* the swap ever took place would the experimenters faith in the swap. It would be untestable. -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Tue Aug 4 19:34:45 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:34:45 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20090804193446.5QAAK.353998.root@hrndva-web02-z01> That's funny, trying to play both sides of the fence by using 'pollution taxes' and 'market forces' in the same meme. The problem with all these 'tax them' is that the system can and does get gamed. The people making the rules are the same ones being taxed for these activities. A free market isn't going to have taxes by definition, a laissez faire system will be regulated but only for fair and open behavior. The problem there is who guards the guards? And what does 'fair' and 'open' mean? Neither are definable in any economic or game theoretic system to sufficient rigor to be useful for any real world application. The other option of control economy is our current state. I also like that spin doctorism of 'revenue neutral' with regard to the polluters paying the tax. You've got two options there, either they are printing funny money or they raise their prices to compensate for the taxes. Remember one rule....The consumer ALWAYS pays the bill! ---- Damien Sullivan wrote: > "Polluter pays" isn't a principle in your world, I guess. > > Pollution taxes could be redistributed per capita, so as to be > revenue-neutral to the government and to the average consumer, but > increasing incentives for savings (e.g. saving $6/gallon instead of > $2). Market forces at work. -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Tue Aug 4 19:52:13 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 14:52:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Climate Models and Public Policy In-Reply-To: <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> Message-ID: <20090804195213.0OUW1.354432.root@hrndva-web02-z01> You're both coming at the same solution from opposite sides but doing too much dancing around to get there... "The notion of saving the planet has nothing to do with intellectual honesty or science. The fact is that the planet was here long before us and will be here long after us. The planet is running fine. What people are talking about is saving themselves and saving their middle-class lifestyles and saving their cash flow." Lynn Margulis The planet is going to change. We have to live here. Those are the two fundamental axioms. Everything else is politics. So, what does that mean? For models to be useful (ie predictive) we'd need to instrument the planet to a degree that we'd not have any place to live. To observe means to change. Live with it. The real crux isn't to modify the global environment, it's to reduce the human impact to 'near zero sum'. What you take out, put back when you're done. Don't leave anything that didn't come from there. As the hikers say "leave only footprints". We need to be looking at our environment and asking how to use it in a sustainable manner real time, not come back some time in the future and clean it up, or tax producers in the hope that it will modify their behavior to be more long term. None of that is going to happen. We need to change the way we build cities, roads, etc. Instead of strip mining resources (be they trees, corn, pavement, or ore) meaning to strip an area and cover it over, it needs to change to strips of used and unused lands. These strips need to be asymptotic to zero width. It needs to be a grating sort of layout. With regard to water and air; take it out, put it back. Not later, now. An advanced society is going to use their natural environment as a catalyst and not as the fodder. ---- John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > > > all known physics tells us that, if you put enough CO2 in the atmosphere, > > global warming will result. > > If it were that simple making good climate models would be easy. It isn't. > During the late Ordovician period, 450 million years ago, there was a huge > amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, about 4400 ppm verses 380 today, and yet > the world was in the grip of a severe ice age. > > > we are seeing a clear rise in temperature. > > It hasn't been very clear during the last decade! > > > we know that the current rise in CO2 and temperature would be a > > *vertical line* on any climate graph of the known Earth history, > > unlike anything we have seen before. > > That is simply untrue. During the last 600 million years the atmosphere has > almost always had far more CO2 than now, abut 3000 ppm on average. The only > exception was a period that lasted from 315 million years ago to 270 where > there was about the same amount of CO2 as we have now. The temperature was > about the same then as it is now too, and during the late Ordovician that I > mentioned before it was much colder, but other than a few very brief ice > ages during the last few million years the temperature has always been > warmer than now, or at least during the last 600 million years it has. > > > Can you show this numerically? If you can show, quantitatively, that one > > or more of the current unknowns in the models are enough to mask the > > cumulative (in the time axis) effect of CO2, water wapor and other > > GHGs, you will have a point, but not yet. > > Can you show me a climate model that has accurately predicted anything? > These things have no track record but you expect us to stake our lives on > them. > > > Somehow the clouds have failed to materialize to save the situation. > > I'm not saying clouds are going to save us, for all I know they could make > things worse, but I am saying that love them or hate them clouds are vitally > important to climate. So how much confidence can you have in a computer > model that doesn't even try to deal with them? > > John K Clark > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Tue Aug 4 19:52:55 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:52:55 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Climate Models and Public Policy Message-ID: <20090804195255.A5J7M.354449.root@hrndva-web02-z01> You're both coming at the same solution from opposite sides but doing too much dancing around to get there... "The notion of saving the planet has nothing to do with intellectual honesty or science. The fact is that the planet was here long before us and will be here long after us. The planet is running fine. What people are talking about is saving themselves and saving their middle-class lifestyles and saving their cash flow." Lynn Margulis The planet is going to change. We have to live here. Those are the two fundamental axioms. Everything else is politics. So, what does that mean? For models to be useful (ie predictive) we'd need to instrument the planet to a degree that we'd not have any place to live. To observe means to change. Live with it. The real crux isn't to modify the global environment, it's to reduce the human impact to 'near zero sum'. What you take out, put back when you're done. Don't leave anything that didn't come from there. As the hikers say "leave only footprints". We need to be looking at our environment and asking how to use it in a sustainable manner real time, not come back some time in the future and clean it up, or tax producers in the hope that it will modify their behavior to be more long term. None of that is going to happen. We need to change the way we build cities, roads, etc. Instead of strip mining resources (be they trees, corn, pavement, or ore) meaning to strip an area and cover it over, it needs to change to strips of used and unused lands. These strips need to be asymptotic to zero width. It needs to be a grating sort of layout. With regard to water and air; take it out, put it back. Not later, now. An advanced society is going to use their natural environment as a catalyst and not as the fodder. ---- John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > > > all known physics tells us that, if you put enough CO2 in the atmosphere, > > global warming will result. > > If it were that simple making good climate models would be easy. It isn't. > During the late Ordovician period, 450 million years ago, there was a huge > amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, about 4400 ppm verses 380 today, and yet > the world was in the grip of a severe ice age. > > > we are seeing a clear rise in temperature. > > It hasn't been very clear during the last decade! > > > we know that the current rise in CO2 and temperature would be a > > *vertical line* on any climate graph of the known Earth history, > > unlike anything we have seen before. > > That is simply untrue. During the last 600 million years the atmosphere has > almost always had far more CO2 than now, abut 3000 ppm on average. The only > exception was a period that lasted from 315 million years ago to 270 where > there was about the same amount of CO2 as we have now. The temperature was > about the same then as it is now too, and during the late Ordovician that I > mentioned before it was much colder, but other than a few very brief ice > ages during the last few million years the temperature has always been > warmer than now, or at least during the last 600 million years it has. > > > Can you show this numerically? If you can show, quantitatively, that one > > or more of the current unknowns in the models are enough to mask the > > cumulative (in the time axis) effect of CO2, water wapor and other > > GHGs, you will have a point, but not yet. > > Can you show me a climate model that has accurately predicted anything? > These things have no track record but you expect us to stake our lives on > them. > > > Somehow the clouds have failed to materialize to save the situation. > > I'm not saying clouds are going to save us, for all I know they could make > things worse, but I am saying that love them or hate them clouds are vitally > important to climate. So how much confidence can you have in a computer > model that doesn't even try to deal with them? > > John K Clark > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 01:07:58 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:07:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Greater American News/GAN" Message-ID: <2d6187670908041807h37a972f3j14a85afdf5973b91@mail.gmail.com> I thought this was rather interesting as a SF take on CNN... I sure hope a terrorist attack on a future space elevator never succeeds, as they show here! http://www.greateramericanews.com/video_03.html# John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 02:11:10 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:11:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Training the Israeli Army's Robot Squads Message-ID: <2d6187670908041911l360ad128tf8291c1edf037e71@mail.gmail.com> Israel would of course be extremely interested in military robots because they are so often engaged in conflict. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/training-the-israeli-armys-robot-squads/ John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 02:17:45 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:17:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds Message-ID: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> It's very good to know Darpa is seriously engaged in tissue regeneration research. : ) http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/miitary-aims-for-instant-repair-of-wartime-wounds/ John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 5 01:56:23 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:56:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria) In-Reply-To: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> > ...On Behalf Of Tom Nowell > ... > It's interesting how much argument on climate change is based > on looking at data, trying to see the developing trends, and > often a graph demonstrating an upward curve is used to > illustrate the point for global warming, and downward curves > on sunspots used to argue for global cooling... Tom Good observations all, Tom. Now that the very recent trend may be towards cooling and the sunspot cycle is wacky low this time, we again (as in the 1970s) have two competing theories of future climate, warming and cooling. Given that there is a risk we will be unable to counteract a trend in either direction, perhaps soon the mainstream will start to look at a new question: which is worse? Looks to me like we have *plenty* of margin for a warmer planet but durn little for a colder one. We are an African species which has radiated over most of this globe, but we are still mostly huddled for warmth near the equator, with the population thinning as one gets further from that temperate band. We humans can survive the warmest places on this planet with little or no technology, but we sure cannot survive the cold without it anywhere but right on the lowest latitudes. Even in sunny Taxifornia, without clothing and combustion, we cannot survive a typical winter night. Without our air conditioning, we would certainly be uncomfortable, but we would live everywhere. Humans live in the hottest equatorial desert without air conditioning, and even with defeating technologies, such as forcing the women there to wear all-covering black garments (shame to those who condone that btw). So what of this? Suppose global climate is changing. It is a minor inconvenience (with some tangeable benefits) if warming, but quickly fatal to jillions if cooling. The risk seems to be on one side. Could it be that our focus on warming theory is all wishful thinking? Or we just can't face the risk of cooling? spike From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 5 02:02:19 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 19:02:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> References: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> <20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> Message-ID: <58E6F3F1C614456BB59DFFB85A9F3CC6@spike> ... > > Damien Sullivan wrote: > > > > > Raise fossil carbon taxes high enough and the... > > > > ...government gets thrown out on their asses. As they > should. spike > > "Polluter pays" isn't a principle in your world, I guess. > > Pollution taxes could be redistributed per capita, so as to > be revenue-neutral to the government and to the average > consumer, but increasing incentives for savings (e.g. saving > $6/gallon instead of $2). Market forces at work. > > -xx- Damien X-) Ja, I got that, but as soon as we redefine CO2 emissions as "pollution" then everyone is a polluter, and we toss those who say CO2 emissions are pollution, replace them with those who say pollution is smoke and poisons. Polluter pays is OK, but not CO2 = pollution. spike From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 02:29:05 2009 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 23:29:05 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> John Grigg>>It's very good to know Darpa is seriously engaged in tissue regeneration research. : ) >> http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/miitary-aims-for-instant-repair-of-wartime-wounds/ This reminds me of that green liquid on Starship Troopers (the movie). Hope they succeed. And I also hope laser pistols and personal energy shields are next. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 5 03:19:28 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:19:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds In-Reply-To: <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> Message-ID: <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> At 11:29 PM 8/4/2009 -0300, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote >And I also hope laser pistols and personal energy shields are next. As an old [non-violent] street demonstrator during the Vietnam war, I really really hope not. Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12970 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 5 04:35:16 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 21:35:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <58E6F3F1C614456BB59DFFB85A9F3CC6@spike> References: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net><20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> <58E6F3F1C614456BB59DFFB85A9F3CC6@spike> Message-ID: <4B51E9A985134B87BF97D8086BD0042F@spike> > ... > > > Damien Sullivan wrote: > > > > > > > Raise fossil carbon taxes high enough and the... > > > ... -xx- Damien X-) > > Ja, I got that, but as soon as we redefine CO2 emissions as > "pollution" then everyone is a polluter... spike > To expand on that thought just a bit, recall that the products of combustion when burning any hydrocarbon in air are carbon dioxide and water: CnH(2n+2) + (sufficient) O2 -> nCO2 + (n+1)H2O If we define carbon dioxide as a pollutant, then logically so is water, but that notion isn't quite as far fetched as it sounds. Certainly flood victims could see water as a pollutant, but if it turns out that high cirrus clouds reflect enough sunlight to dominate CO2 greenhouse warming, then a consequence of hydrocarbon burning would be global cooling, in which case H2O is the real pollutant, with CO2 making an unsuccessful attempt to save us from ourselves. This all reminds me of all the grief that was given to Ronald Reagan for commenting thus: "Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." -- Ronald Reagan, 1981 Depending on how one defines pollution, he was absolutely right. Recall that there was an enormous push to regulate VOCs, Volatile Organic Compounds. Their reduction in California resulted in a change in the chemistry of paint, which took a while for industry to master, which is why we had cars for a few years in which the paint on our Detroits failed quickly. If we define any VOC as pollution, then notice next time you go to the forest, that wonderful pine smell. It is in the air, therefore it is volatile, and it certainly isn't an element, so it is a compound, and it came off of a tree, which surely makes it an organic volatile compound. It can be easily detected by smell. Now go to a vast parking lot filled with Detroits. Any gasoline smell there? Not much if at all, not if the cars were built since about mid to late 70s. Not all pollution is equal. If we define pollution as VOCs, then trees DO pollute more than cars. If we define carbon dioxide as a pollutant, then our breathing pollutes, along with all manner of natural processes, perhaps the worst of which is a lightning-caused forest fire. A gentle soul-cleansing spring shower is pollution falling from the sky. We bathe daily in pollution, we devour pollution several times a day. I counterpropose that we define pollution to specifically exclude pine emissions, carbon dioxide and water. spike From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 5 04:58:23 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 00:58:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] did the multiverse just get thinner? References: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <4FEEBE451D2B44059718BCF0920D3FD9@MyComputer> "Damien Broderick" > Has anyone yet commented on the (extremely implausible) possibility that > the LHC *must* create a world-killing black hole--or wormhole or the > like--in the vast majority of adjacent or superposed worlds where a series > of absurd accidents and coincidences *hasn't* stopped the machine from > being activated? And since we're still here, it's precisely because our > world is one of the few with the serious breakdowns... If this crazy idea > catches on, there'll be even more fearful voices clamoring to have the > thing smashed. I don't see why, if true we have nothing to worry about. In a infinite number of parallel worlds there must be one where it's one damn breakdown after another and they never get the LHC up and running, and after all one is all you'd need. John K Clark From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 5 05:48:12 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 01:48:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4A761F77.6090604@libero.it><4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com><7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com><1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer><4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com><11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: "Alfio Puglisi" > you seem to have a lot of faith in what science says about a period 450 > millions years ago That's because in general our knowledge of the past is greater than out knowledge of the future. > you don't believe models based on reliable historical records Historical records? So you're saying these computer models claim to fame is that they accurately predicted the past! And I can't comment on the paper that you say made good predictions about the Pinatubo eruption because the link you supplied is dead; but I'm guessing it said things would get a bit cooler for a year or two. Not exactly a gutsy and astounding prediction now is it. > Do they [computer models] reliably predict a northward shift in tropical > rain bands during the mid-Holocene? Yes. Predicting the past is easy. > Do they predict last glacial climates as cold as observed based on their > included physics? Yes. Predicting the past is easy. > Do they reliably project rainfall changes in the New York in 20 years > time - probably not. Predicting the future is hard. > Who cares what the CO2 level was 600 million years ago? I care because I'm not just talking about 600 million years ago, at NO time in the last 600 million years has CO2 levels been significantly lower than now and during most of that time it was about 10 times higher than now, sometimes closer to 15 or even 20. And yet life thrived. > The vertical line description is another reference to the speed of the > change, an argument that you seem unable to grasp On a chart that plots the CO2 levels over the last 600 million years you'd need an electron microscope to see that "vertical line" you're so terrified of; assuming the damn thing even exists. John K Clark From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 08:26:34 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:26:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4B51E9A985134B87BF97D8086BD0042F@spike> References: <20090804022933.GA26842@ofb.net> <20090804190747.GB30505@ofb.net> <58E6F3F1C614456BB59DFFB85A9F3CC6@spike> <4B51E9A985134B87BF97D8086BD0042F@spike> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050126u7b974aa0y4700f5e2671b90cd@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:35 AM, spike wrote: > If we define carbon dioxide as a pollutant, then our breathing pollutes, This is incorrect. Most living things aren't net emitters or sinks of carbon, except for a small quantity when you die. Breathing just releases carbon that was taken out of the atmosphere at most some years before. > along with all manner of natural processes, perhaps the worst of which is a > lightning-caused forest fire. But as long as the forest area remains constant, again the net carbon emission is zero. Lightnings aren't a cause of deforestation. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 08:43:37 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:43:37 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:48 AM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> ?you don't believe models based on reliable historical records > > Historical records? So you're saying these computer models claim to fame is > that they accurately predicted the past! No, I say that computer models are based on physics derived from observing what happens in the world. It's just that observations in modern times are much more accurate than paleontological data from half a billion years ago. > And I can't comment on the paper > that you say made good predictions about the Pinatubo eruption because the > link you supplied is dead; The link was for the other paper. I just checked and it works now. > but I'm guessing it said things would get a bit > cooler for a year or two. Not exactly a gutsy and astounding prediction now > is it. Well, you asked for "anything" :-) > On a chart that plots the CO2 levels over the last 600 million years you'd > need an electron microscope to see that "vertical line" you're so terrified of I'm looking at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png I could see a change of some hundreds of ppm on that graph even without my glasses :-) And here is the famous vertical line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png > assuming the damn thing even exists. Modern CO2 measures are very reliable, and precise to at least a few ppm.You don't need to "assume" that it exists. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 08:51:02 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:51:02 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Do not invoke the so called high science and then asume that it's on your side of the debate. Rather ask yourself, how many Amazon rivers you need to fill the world ocean to an additional meter in 100 years. The elementary arithmetics will show you the utter nonsense of such a claim. Then you may proceed, if you still want to. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alito at organicrobot.com Wed Aug 5 09:37:56 2009 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:37:56 +1000 Subject: [ExI] did the multiverse just get thinner? In-Reply-To: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> References: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <1249465076.31609.283.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 11:42 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > Giant Particle Collider Fizzles > By DENNIS OVERBYE > > > with thousands of bad electrical connections. > > Many of the magnets meant to whiz high-energy subatomic particles > around a 17-mile underground racetrack have mysteriously lost their > ability to operate at high energies.> > > Has anyone yet commented on the (extremely implausible) possibility > that the LHC *must* create a world-killing black hole--or wormhole or > the like--in the vast majority of adjacent or superposed worlds where > a series of absurd accidents and coincidences *hasn't* stopped the > machine from being activated? And since we're still here, it's > precisely because our world is one of the few with the serious > breakdowns... Yes. Usual suspects. http://lesswrong.com/lw/u5/how_many_lhc_failures_is_too_many/ From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 09:42:38 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:42:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050242n7a756b12hfd331ae362051dcb@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : > Do not invoke the so called high science and then asume that it's on your > side of the debate. > > Rather ask yourself, how many Amazon rivers you need to fill the world ocean > to an additional meter in 100 years. > > The elementary arithmetics will show you the utter nonsense of such a claim. > > Then you may proceed, if you still want to. Did you do the calculation? You might be surprised by the results. Unless I made some big mistake, it works out to a bit less than 0.5 amazon rivers. But you are not just filling a bowl with water: thermal expansion of the oceans is the biggest factor in sea level rise. Mountain glaciers melting and Greenland melting are the next bigger factor. See the graphs on this page: https://publicaffairs.llnl.gov/news/news_releases/2008/NR-08-06-07.html Since thermal expansion amount for at least half of the total, you need less than 0.25 amazons, distributed over all the Arctic area and all the glacier-runoff rivers. You would hardly notice. Alfio From scerir at libero.it Wed Aug 5 10:08:59 2009 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:08:59 +0200 Subject: [ExI] did the multiverse just get thinner? References: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <1249465076.31609.283.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <000401ca15b4$c32c7e10$e4084797@archimede> > Yes. Usual suspects. > http://lesswrong.com/lw/u5/how_many_lhc_failures_is_too_many/ it's just the misanthropic principle at work (there is no such a principle in the other parts of the multiverse, I guess ... http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526130.100-misanthropic-principle.html From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 10:14:37 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:14:37 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050242n7a756b12hfd331ae362051dcb@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050242n7a756b12hfd331ae362051dcb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Where do you have half an Amazon on the Antarctica? 100 000 cubic meters per second. 10 liters per second at every meter of the Antartica's coast! Do the math! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 11:08:31 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:08:31 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908041009x1eacc1ech31efabd572f09d36@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <6B547D5E5B8E4FB2943E321D7E6E99CC@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031537o762b5f64nf8750798058a87e9@mail.gmail.com> <6E40416B3E0E4ACD8DC47D84C4E0F560@MyComputer> <4902d9990908040114h15d07170vb4910442bdafec41@mail.gmail.com> <4EB9F0680F0346CB98312FCA8E270525@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041009x1eacc1ech31efabd572f09d36@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: 2009/8/5 Alfio Puglisi : > You don't need something that will give you a 100% solution. For > "major player" I mean something comparable to hydro, or nuclear, that > is, something capable of supplying a good fraction of the total > electricity generation. Wind energy recent growth has been impressive > (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power#Wind power usage ). It is > now making sizable power generation in small countries, and has now > appearing on big nations' charts. > > Currently, the biggest problem with wind farms is overloading: when > there's too much wind, they have to shut down the farm because either > the grid can't take it, or the other plants can't power down fast > enough. But if you have a lot of storage at hand that can adsorb the > power surge, like, say, some tens of millions of parked electric cars, > this can play nicely. Various efforts, collectively called "smart > grids", are going in this direction. Another not-100%-solution but with a smaller capital cost than new renewable or nuclear energy generation is natural gas, which releases about half the CO2 compared to coal for a given amount of energy, and less than 1% of the particulate pollution. Natural gas can also be used directly in car engines with minimal modification and greater efficiency as compared to electric motors (when you take into account that the electricity will still mostly be generated using fossil fuels). Finally, natural gas is very abundant when non-conventional sources such as shale and coal seam methane is taken into account: enough for at least a century at current rates of usage, perhaps much more if methane hydrates are ever exploited. -- Stathis Papaioannou From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:00:12 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:00:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria) In-Reply-To: <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:56 AM, spike wrote: > So what of this? ?Suppose global climate is changing. ?It is a minor > inconvenience (with some tangeable benefits) if warming, but quickly fatal > to jillions if cooling. ?The risk seems to be on one side. ?Could it be that > our focus on warming theory is all wishful thinking? We don't have a "warming theory", but climate models. They can go both ways. > Or we just can't face the risk of cooling? All current evidence points to warming in a medium timescale (100s of years), so that's what we are preparing to face. It's that simple. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:10:55 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:10:55 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Have you calculated, Alfio? Have you seen this tremendous inflow from Antarctica? 10 liters per second on every meter of the ANtarctica's coast? If not ... you have no case here. Not you, not the whole GW movement, who is unable to do the basic math. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:18:31 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:18:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph In-Reply-To: <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> References: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908050718p1dd114a4xe16ccda00e1a0268@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > > Why is this better than trying to get off fossil carbon and removing > CO2 from the atmosphere? ### Dealing with the theoretical downsides of high CO2 costs pennies per capita, eliminating anthropogenic CO2 costs many trillions of dollars, plus CO2 has significant positive effects on agriculture. Carbon mitigation is just a religion, going strongly against economic calculation and common sense. Rafal From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:42:30 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:42:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] some inneresting comments of the Krugman graph In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908050718p1dd114a4xe16ccda00e1a0268@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090803221728586.BPSE24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <20090803224604653.PZVM18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090803230816.GA16059@ofb.net> <7641ddc60908050718p1dd114a4xe16ccda00e1a0268@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > Carbon mitigation is just a religion, going strongly against economic > calculation and common sense. Not only that. They are failing in the most basic math and nobody noticed. The Ocean to rise for a meter to 2100, would need 0.3 million cubic kilometers of water from Antarctica. 3*10^17 litrers per 3*10^9 seconds. 10^8 liters per second. 10 liters per second on every meter of the coast of Antarctica. Did anybody saw something like that? I don't think so. We are talking about 100 cubic kilometers of ice melting per year and of about 200 cubic kilometers of snow per year for the entire continent of Antarctica. There about. And Al Gore and other "scientists" are talking about the sea rise of about a meter in 100 years. Where from? They are disconnected from the reality. - Thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 14:50:04 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:50:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria) In-Reply-To: References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050750x676b3fe3mc876bebed4b0a502@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : > Have you calculated, Alfio? > > Have you seen this tremendous inflow from Antarctica? > > 10 liters per second on every meter of the ANtarctica's coast? I did calculate the rate, in the other thread. Please respond there. And note Antarctica doesn't enter the equation. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:03:01 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:03:01 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050750x676b3fe3mc876bebed4b0a502@mail.gmail.com> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050750x676b3fe3mc876bebed4b0a502@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Who enters if not Antarctica? Who has enough ice for something like that? No fancy-pancy global warming science interests me, until you elaborate this meter (6 meters according to Al Gore) sea rising, and from where you intend to get the necessary water. - Thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:12:28 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:12:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) Message-ID: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : > Who enters if not Antarctica? > > Who has enough ice for something like that? thermal expansion of water, glaciers, and Greenland. > > No fancy-pancy global warming science interests me, until you elaborate this > meter (6 meters according to Al Gore) sea rising, and from where you intend > to get the necessary water. You started from the Amazon river, now it's Antarctica. You started with 1 meter, now it's 6 meters. Before I can answer, you need to make up your mind. How many meters you want to see justified? one, six, or more? Do you want me to defend statements from scientists, or from Al Gore? Alfio From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 5 15:17:22 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:17:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com><1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer><4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com><11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer><4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > I'm looking at this: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png I could > see > a change of some hundreds of ppm on that graph even without my glasses Yes, and it conforms exactly with what I said in a previous post. What is your point? > And here is the famous vertical line: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png It looks to me like that terrifying "vertical line" of yours is very much like the "vertical line" seen 150,000 years ago, and 250,000 years ago, and 350,000 years ago; and I was correct, on a plot of CO2 over the last 600 million years you would need an electron microscope to see any of these tiny changes. John K Clark From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:22:40 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:22:40 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: According to your saint Al, it is 6 meters. According to a bit soberer IPCC, it is a meter or so, to 2100. Still, I wander where will you get the water you need. Groenland has springs of water, 100 liters per meter per second on its beaches? All around the island, 24/7/365??? Or it is just a "termal expansion"? But guess what. Seas are even colder lately. How you will warm them so fast? kilometers deep down? How? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:31:38 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:31:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer> <4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:17 PM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" >> And here is the famous vertical line: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png > > It looks to me like that terrifying "vertical line" of yours is very much > like the "vertical line" seen 150,000 years ago, and 250,000 years ago, and > 350,000 years ago; Nope, you have to read graphs carefully. Those lines took at least some thousands of years. Our only took a century or two, and will go much higher in another one. > and I was correct, on a plot of CO2 over the last 600 > million years you would need an electron microscope to see any of these tiny > changes. Notice that each of the three "tiny changes" you listed is an ice age. It means that, even if the change doesn't make itself obious in the 600 million year graph, it doesn't mean that it has no consequences. And the speed is what matters. But if you think an ice age is a tiny change, I don't think we can arrive at any agreement. Alfio From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:45:42 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:45:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Re: Will abundance hurt motivation to create? In-Reply-To: <4A79A4DD.70806@kurtz-fernhout.com> References: <710b78fc0908041842o28a33907x9a4ee54f1e84b954@mail.gmail.com> <4A79A4DD.70806@kurtz-fernhout.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908050845x2fd6e25n98e3a44841252079@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul D. Fernhout Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:27 AM Subject: [Open Manufacturing] Re: Will abundance hurt motivation to create? To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com Emlyn wrote: > We keep seeing this assertion, that without incentive to create, our > society will stagnate as we all become hopeless lotus eaters, and no > one invents or creates or designs anything significant because they > can't get paid for it. > > Now I think we all suspect that not only would this not be true in an > abundant society, it is not true now. In fact, it seems that all > people require to be creative is that they can easily interact with > like-minded others and that it doesn't cost them too much (never mind > being paid). > > However, just saying it aint so doesn't really cut it. Does anyone > (Paul?) know of useful work in this area, ie: what it takes to > optimally foster innovation? Do someone need to put serious effort > into researching & writing something? That issue comes up too in Joseph Jackson's excellent presentation here: (you need to download the 2/4/09 show, it is discussed about 3/4 way through, where Joseph talks about the Fundamental Attribution error, as, in that case, "We blog for free, but all those people out there are lazy." :-): ? http://www.blogtalkradio.com/fastforwardradio/blog/2009/02 ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error Alfie Kohn is a good source, because he has studied the literature: "Studies Find Reward Often No Motivator Creativity and intrinsic interest diminish if task is done for gain" by Alfie Kohn http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/motivation.html "No Contest: The Case Against Competition " http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/nc.htm "Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other Bribes" http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/pbr.htm What I find interesting is that people's first objection to post-scarcity or abundance or a basic income is always: "Nobody will work, and people will all be bums, and society will collapse because no one will pick up the garbage." But, the second objection is always the opposite: "If everyone has free time, they'll make lots of free music, figure out ways to use robots to pick up garbage for free, give free counseling and advice over the internet, and thus put musicians, garbage collectors, and psychologists and doctors out of work, and the economy will collapse." :-) So, which is it? :-) Try it. Next time someone talks about motivation, ask them how much current businesses are under pressure from people doing stuff for free, or would be, if everyone did not have to work. :-) What I see happening, is that, as Bob Black suggests, ? "The abolition of work" ? http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/whywork/abolition.html based on the ideas of Charles Fourier: ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Fourier that without economic wage-slaves to do the disagreeable tasks of the world, we will either decide they don't need to be done, we will re-engineer them to be fun (fun like blogging for some), or we will find some way to motivate people to do them (status, a sense of ownership, whatever). How many people like taking out the trash at home or cleaning their own toilets? How many people like changing diapers on babies day after day? But it gets done. So, some of this is also a perception of "ownership" or "duty" or "love". Debian GNU/Linux has *only* thousands of maintainers out of millions of users, but that one out of a thousand is enough to make it all work. So, another aspect is that, because technology is an amplifier, if a billion people can use 3D printers to print out iPhones, you only need a few motivated people to design them and everyone else benefits. In the end, we really don't need that many good designs to supply basic human needs to everyone. So, the few can, out of the joy of meaningful work, supply the many. Naturally, once people have the free time, more people will design for fun. This argument also often confuses two things: do people have the *motivation* to be creative, or do they have the *time*, *tools*, *resources*, *education*, and *community* to be creative? In a world where everything was free or cheap, a lot of people would be able to be creative when today they are just frustrated. Not everyone might want to be, say a mechanical engineer designing free cars, as it does take some talent and some interest, but lots and lots of people might want to, *if* they had the time and resources to be generous. Actually, the orange without the tree idea came up because the other day I was talking with someone about these issues, and he objected that people with orange plantations in Florida would just sell them because they weren't profitable enough, especially if they could not get people to work for cheap because everyone had a basic income and so no one wanted to pick oranges for cheap. So, I said, well, let's really look at that problem. What would really happen if, as a society, we could not get illegal immagrants to pick oranges for cheap? Well, you'd either pay the people more, or you'd build robots to do the picking, or you'd engineer the trees so they dropped their oranges into troughs when they got ripe, or you'd figure out how to grow the oranges without the trees. :-) People say that one reason why the Greeks did not develop innovations like the steam engine for pumping water, even though they had a version by Hero of Alexandria, is that they had slaves. Well, we have "wage slaves" in the USA (and China) which are much the same thing. And so, as a society, we have not been that motivated :-) to re-engineer things so we don't need to do them, or so that doing them is fun (even "hard fun" with a sense of "flow"). So, just think of all the new *motivation* we would have to redesign our infrastructure more compassionately if no one would work for pay. :-) --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group. To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:49:22 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:49:22 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : > Still, I wander where will you get the water you need. Total water discharge of fresh water into the oceans from rivers, etc. is 1 million cubic meters per second. If you just increase this by 10% you'll have all the water you need for a 1 meter sea level rise, even without the thermal expansion. It seems to me a small increase. > > Groenland has springs of water, 100 liters per meter per second on its > beaches? All around the island, 24/7/365??? You seem to visualize sea level rise like a fountain of water from the coasts of Antarctica and greenland, at dozens of liters per second. But think about this: the sea level is already rising, today, at a rate of about 300 mm/year. That's one third of the speed you find incredible. According to your own calculations, that should equate to 3 liters/second from each meter of Antarctica coast, or 30 liters per meter from greenland. Do you see those fountains? I don't. But sea level is rising anyway. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:54:44 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:54:44 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > If you just increase this by 10% you'll have all the water you need for a 1 meter sea level rise Where from it will come? From the sea? This way the seas will not rise. Don't be silly. >From the ice? Back to Antarctica or Groenland! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 15:57:08 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:57:08 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > the sea level is already rising, today, at a rate of about 300 mm/year Who told you that? Al Gore? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:06:34 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:06:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions Message-ID: <55ad6af70908050906r703f36c3o22d7c64e08f76a5b@mail.gmail.com> Hello, I am looking for a dataset that maps different brain regions to different bounding boxes, or even different fuzzy coordinates within the brain. Anything more particular would be greatly appreciated as well. There seem to be a few coordinate systems already out there such as: Talairach, MNI, stereotaxic, and spherical systems. Yet, I still can't find any models that say "here is an example of a standard model of a brain, and here is a list of bounding geometries that correlate to different names of regions." For others looking for similar information, the Allen Brain Institute dataset of gene expression mapped to different tissue slices is awesome. Though it's not quite what I'm looking for here. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:09:28 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:09:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : >> the sea level is already rising, today, at a rate of about 300 mm/year > > Who told you that? Al Gore? > No, a satellite. Tomaz, you could try lifting a finger every now and then. Google "sea level rise", you'll find plenty of data and measurements. Alfio. From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:10:15 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:10:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : >>> the sea level is already rising, today, at a rate of about 300 mm/year Again, I made the obvious mistake. It's 300 mm /century. Sorry Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:27:52 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:27:52 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Where the water comes from? Where? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:36:56 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:36:56 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : > Where the water comes from? > > Where? >From glaciers, greenland and thermal expansion of the water. See this page: http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_level.html in particular, the chapter titled "How glaciers' contribution to sea level is computed" Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 16:46:31 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:46:31 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Glaciers from where? Antarctica? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Wed Aug 5 16:18:35 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:18:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] maybe if he shaved his beard Message-ID: <212629.72805.qm@web59914.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> [ExI] Aubrey de Grey poses for Playboy magazine? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Wed Aug 5 17:01:16 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:01:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908050906r703f36c3o22d7c64e08f76a5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090805170116.7CXO8.334376.root@hrndva-web10-z01> This is from 2005... http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1239902 The connection matrix of the human brain (the human ?connectome?) represents an indispensable foundation for basic and applied neurobiological research. However, the network of anatomical connections linking the neuronal elements of the human brain is still largely unknown. While some databases or collations of large-scale anatomical connection patterns exist for other mammalian species, there is currently no connection matrix of the human brain, nor is there a coordinated research effort to collect, archive, and disseminate this important information. We propose a research strategy to achieve this goal, and discuss its potential impact. ---- Bryan Bishop wrote: > Hello, > > I am looking for a dataset that maps different brain regions to > different bounding boxes, or even different fuzzy coordinates within > the brain. Anything more particular would be greatly appreciated as > well. > > There seem to be a few coordinate systems already out there such as: > Talairach, MNI, stereotaxic, and spherical systems. Yet, I still can't > find any models that say "here is an example of a standard model of a > brain, and here is a list of bounding geometries that correlate to > different names of regions." > > For others looking for similar information, the Allen Brain Institute > dataset of gene expression mapped to different tissue slices is > awesome. Though it's not quite what I'm looking for here. > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 17:14:33 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:14:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <20090805170116.7CXO8.334376.root@hrndva-web10-z01> References: <55ad6af70908050906r703f36c3o22d7c64e08f76a5b@mail.gmail.com> <20090805170116.7CXO8.334376.root@hrndva-web10-z01> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908051014l1535c56cye0db18e802f3ab9d@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM, James Choate wrote: > This is from 2005... > > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1239902 The connectome projects (like brainbow) are certainly interesting, however that's not necessarily the dataset that I am looking for. The connections between different regions of the brain would be absolutely marvelous to have. For the time being, I am more interested in an atlas that doesn't actually involve pictures, and instead says- with coordinates- "this region is located here", where "here" is with respect to some reference frame. And if you haven't seen brainbow, you've been missing out: http://heybryan.org/books/papers/brainbow/brain-350_tcm18-105648.jpg - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Wed Aug 5 17:20:58 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:20:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908051014l1535c56cye0db18e802f3ab9d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090805172059.D6KV7.334795.root@hrndva-web10-z01> So you're wanting a reference voxel set for brain morphology? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=voxel+dataset+brain+morphology&aq=f&oq=&aqi= ---- Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM, James Choate wrote: > > This is from 2005... > > > > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1239902 > > The connectome projects (like brainbow) are certainly interesting, > however that's not necessarily the dataset that I am looking for. The > connections between different regions of the brain would be absolutely > marvelous to have. For the time being, I am more interested in an > atlas that doesn't actually involve pictures, and instead says- with > coordinates- "this region is located here", where "here" is with > respect to some reference frame. > > And if you haven't seen brainbow, you've been missing out: > > http://heybryan.org/books/papers/brainbow/brain-350_tcm18-105648.jpg > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From jonkc at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 5 17:35:10 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 13:35:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><1016AE8929564398BFDCED2129A87ECE@MyComputer><4902d9990908031554p25ff2e1cwf00895caa28e7e00@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com><11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer><4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com><03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> Me: >> It looks to me like that terrifying "vertical line" of yours is very much >> like the "vertical line" seen 150,000 years ago, and 250,000 years ago, >> and 350,000 years ago "Alfio Puglisi" > Nope Yep. To my eyes your famous vertical line looks no more vertical than several other vertical lines on the same chart. > you have to read graphs carefully. If you have to look that "carefully" then all you're seeing is noise. > Our only took a century or two, and will go much higher in another one. How the hell do you know? John K Clark From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Wed Aug 5 17:36:22 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:36:22 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908051014l1535c56cye0db18e802f3ab9d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090805173622.3O4AN.335102.root@hrndva-web10-z01> Voxel Based Morphometry (VBM) http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=voxel+based+morphometry&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g3 ---- Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM, James Choate wrote: > > This is from 2005... > > > > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1239902 > > The connectome projects (like brainbow) are certainly interesting, > however that's not necessarily the dataset that I am looking for. The > connections between different regions of the brain would be absolutely > marvelous to have. For the time being, I am more interested in an > atlas that doesn't actually involve pictures, and instead says- with > coordinates- "this region is located here", where "here" is with > respect to some reference frame. > > And if you haven't seen brainbow, you've been missing out: > > http://heybryan.org/books/papers/brainbow/brain-350_tcm18-105648.jpg > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 17:42:03 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 19:42:03 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Answer here, Alfio. Do not link for a possible answer to a simple question. Are those glaciers from Antarctica mainly? How then, that we do not see a collosal water flow of a 3 liters per second per every meter of Antarctica's coast? That would be needed for sea to rise 300 mm/century. How come? Are those flows hidden? Is it not Antarctica but Groendland? What happened to the basic math? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Wed Aug 5 17:45:27 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:45:27 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908051014l1535c56cye0db18e802f3ab9d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090805174527.T0RH8.335306.root@hrndva-web10-z01> If VBM is what you're looking for with regard to data sets, then get in touch with these guys as they have 451 of them... http://cds.ismrm.org/ismrm-2001/PDF5/1374.pdf ---- Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM, James Choate wrote: > > This is from 2005... > > > > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1239902 > > The connectome projects (like brainbow) are certainly interesting, > however that's not necessarily the dataset that I am looking for. The > connections between different regions of the brain would be absolutely > marvelous to have. For the time being, I am more interested in an > atlas that doesn't actually involve pictures, and instead says- with > coordinates- "this region is located here", where "here" is with > respect to some reference frame. > > And if you haven't seen brainbow, you've been missing out: > > http://heybryan.org/books/papers/brainbow/brain-350_tcm18-105648.jpg > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 17:58:09 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:58:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <20090805174527.T0RH8.335306.root@hrndva-web10-z01> References: <55ad6af70908051014l1535c56cye0db18e802f3ab9d@mail.gmail.com> <20090805174527.T0RH8.335306.root@hrndva-web10-z01> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908051058q41e71229rbbf8d6a69ce7e59f@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:45 PM, James Choate wrote: > If VBM is what you're looking for with regard to data sets, then get in touch with these guys as they have 451 of them... > > http://cds.ismrm.org/ismrm-2001/PDF5/1374.pdf James, VBM SPM templates are merely a collection of dot img files and a binary mask representing whether or not certain voxels belong to one of three classifications: white matter, grey matter, or cerebrospinal fluid (csf). This isn't sufficient. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Wed Aug 5 18:02:35 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:02:35 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Coordinates of brain regions In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908051058q41e71229rbbf8d6a69ce7e59f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090805180236.WLCLK.335680.root@hrndva-web10-z01> VBM can be, and is used for other things than just that sort of differentiation. You're description of what VBM is capable of is incomplete. If you would provide a clearer description of what you're looking for it might help. Try talking to these guys... http://neuro.imm.dtu.dk/wiki/Main_Page or dig around some of the data set search engines. ---- Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:45 PM, James Choate wrote: > > If VBM is what you're looking for with regard to data sets, then get in touch with these guys as they have 451 of them... > > > > http://cds.ismrm.org/ismrm-2001/PDF5/1374.pdf > > James, VBM SPM templates are merely a collection of dot img files and > a binary mask representing whether or not certain voxels belong to one > of three classifications: white matter, grey matter, or cerebrospinal > fluid (csf). This isn't sufficient. > > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 18:23:10 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 20:23:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908051123h74322e64t348ebb0499d1cb79@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:35 PM, John K Clark wrote: >> Our only took a century or two, and will go much higher in another one. > > How the hell do you know? I thought it was obvious. Economic factors will keep oil in place until well after the peak. Then there is coal, natural gas, etc. If I am not mistaken, current policy goals are thinking of 450 or 500 ppm, which is already pretty higher than now, and that's the optimistic target. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 18:29:02 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 20:29:02 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908051129g26c300a1u2d8b084b751c3ab5@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 Tomaz Kristan : >How then, that we do not see a collosal water flow of a 3 liters per second per every meter of Antarctica's coast? That would be needed for sea to rise 300 mm/century. That's what *I* asked *you*. The current sea level rise is a fact. It's you who have to answer. > Answer here, Alfio. Do not link for a possible answer to a simple question. If you don't read links, I'm not going to answer any question from you anymore. It seems that you prefer ignorance to knowledge. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 19:42:52 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 21:42:52 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908051129g26c300a1u2d8b084b751c3ab5@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050909u384f3d19xe7c51eb6a3fbe493@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050910o4219bbdr1f0fed96ae50ce45@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050936y5adbf316w489c389732fcc0db@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908051129g26c300a1u2d8b084b751c3ab5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: It is not the fact, I am sorry. Where from you get this so called fact? But if you insist that it _is_ the fact, tell us where from all this water comes! Where is the mighty river from which glacier? There are few small streams in Antarctica and few in Greenland, far from 100 million cubic kilometers per century. Told you already, that that would require at least 3 liters per second per meter, pouring out into sea across Antarctica. At every meter of its 10000 kilometers long beach. Then, you could promise this one foot per century sea rise. Or whoever is talking this stupidity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 19:47:42 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 15:47:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > > 1) ?If you want to criticize models, you better make sure that you > know how they work. Current climatic models *cannot*, by design, > reproduce the climate signal over a time span as short as 10 years. ### The problem is that predicted temperatures at one point in time crucially depend on the predictions for preceding times, which makes it more difficult to predict the longer the time span involved. Your errors compound, rather than average out. You need to know the climate sensitivity to CO2 and a number of additional variables describing various secondary processes, like releases of CO2 from other sources, interactions between CO2, temperatures, aerosols, biogenic chlorine compound production (changes with temperatures and humidity) and the feedback effects between them all - and climatologists still cannot make models correctly predicting climate over years or decades, however you slice it. ------------------------------------------------- > > You have it backwards. It's easier to predict climate over decades > than over a few years, because random processes (weather) and > oscillations (ENSO, etc) will average out. > ### Random processes average out, yes, but the systematic errors of the model (such as CO2 sensitivity pulled out of thin air) compound. ------------------------------ > > 3) "the current period of ?global cooling when it started in 1998" > > can you please provide a reference (with numbers) for a "global > cooling started in 1998"? ? Plotting GISS data from 1998 to 2008 I get > a positive slope of ?+0.0106 ?C/year, too small to be statistically > significant given the variation of the period, but hardly evidence of > "cooling". ### What do you mean by "statistically significant"? The year 1998 was the warmest in recent history, right? It follows logically that no year since then could have been warmer (or else it would become the new record year). It then follows that for the last 11 years there was a period of cooler weather, compared to 1998. -------------------------------------- > >> ### Our infrastructure cannot deal with destroying fifteen or more >> trillion dollars that would be necessary to stop anthropogenic CO2 >> emissions. > > Can you please give a reference for that $15T number? Did you also > find the cost of not stopping the CO2 emission (that is, the cost of > adaption), and compared? ### Honestly? I just made it up. Actually, once you start looking at other estimates, it pales in comparison - for example, Kyoto protocol cost 670 billion already, and it might reduce warming by 0.07C. If there was a linear relationship between the amount of money thrown at the issue and the resulting cooling, it would cost about 100T (worldwide) to cool by 1C. Nobody knows how many Tdollars it would take to stop global warming (if it is real) but we can be sure it will be many. As for the cost of adaptation (i.e. do nothing, even assuming global warming is real), it has been estimated at 50 billion dollars in the US - essentially invisible in an economy worth 50Tdollars. --------------------------------- > > why you are also sure that adding CO2 to > the atmosphere will change nothing? ### I am sure there is insufficient data to make precise predictions about climate 100 years from now. Did you read something else into my statements? ----------------------------- Why do you think that the change > will be smaller than the IPCC says and not, for example, much higher? ### The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one, therefore their results can be treated as propaganda rather than science. Rafal From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 5 21:13:36 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 14:13:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <12A7B8E0B69841C6B7A20FE460F4ED85@spike> ....On Behalf Of Tomaz Kristan .... Or it is just a "thermal expansion"? But guess what. Seas are even colder lately. How you will warm them so fast? kilometers deep down? How? It has been a while since I did the calcs, but I recall trying to estimate the risk of shutting down the Atlantic currents by warming at the poles. When I did the estimates, I found that increasing the air temperature did very little to the temperature of the ocean. I never did follow up to see if others concluded likewise, but my BOTECs showed that the overwhelming factor for ocean cooling near the pole is radiation into space. Changing the air temperature 20C didn't change the water temperature much at all. You have *some* conduction from the melting ice cap, but even that factor was way smaller than the radiation factor as I recall. It has been over ten yrs ago however. Anyone here do a model of that? Or know where to find a good one? spike From spike66 at att.net Wed Aug 5 21:19:47 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 14:19:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > ...On Behalf Of Alfio Puglisi > ... > > But think about this: the sea level is already rising, today, > at a rate of about 300 mm/year. ... sea level is rising anyway. > > Alfio Did you mean micrometers per year? Or millimeters per millenium? Millimeters per century? spike From kanzure at gmail.com Wed Aug 5 22:44:04 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:44:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Re: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? In-Reply-To: <4A7A094E.2040900@kurtz-fernhout.com> References: <28c9b9bd-7acf-40ca-85e9-1e84ff3b6a24@r2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <6ee2332b0908031405l40372d76w6abfeaba642e7fcd@mail.gmail.com> <4A776934.6080505@kurtz-fernhout.com> <6ee2332b0908031726t1ad40dadkf4a3cd4eaebdfd32@mail.gmail.com> <55ad6af70908031734yaa9f4a2we9c64bca682e7c98@mail.gmail.com> <6ee2332b0908031755n437855fayff69e86085c789aa@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc0908032013q3648e25cv7262f532437184d9@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e0908050024h851a01bu46732ba04a344446@mail.gmail.com> <4A7A094E.2040900@kurtz-fernhout.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908051544l3ecbd0c3qa0c6ba2588f3c40b@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul D. Fernhout Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:35 PM Subject: [Open Manufacturing] Re: [Cosmic Engineers] Re: It is all free! The improbable dream? To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com Kevin Carson wrote: > On 8/5/09, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> This is not altogether clear. ?There are not a lot of examples of Open >> Source or equivalent ?hardware design that beats out proprietary efforts. > > The question should not be whether open source projects can beat out > proprietary ones where the latter exist and their patents are > enforceable, any more than the abolitionist movement was about > outcompeting slavery with free labor and "may the best man win." > Slavery should not exist at all, and neither should patents or > copyrights. That's a powerful point, taking the moral high ground. You might want to develop that analogy. When I tried it once, I got some pushback but in the end, I think you *can* show how patents and copyrights directly injure and kill people in various ways. My first tries were here: "License management tools: good, bad, or ugly?" http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/browse_thread/thread/df4b4363d544f766/1e499c6db59117a2 Example of something I wrote back in 2001 and a reply on it showing it did not go over well: """ ?>Metaphorically, consider "slave" files and "free" files. Our current ?>copyright system is now in some ways like the American South before the ?>Civil War where black people (or now "creative works") were often ?>assumed to be a runaway slave unless they had their papers of freedom ?>with them (or a pass from the slave holder). This kind of comparison is very similar to invoking the Nazi's. ?I find it very hard to take such metaphors seriously. ?In fact I find them offensive. """ I apologized, but, as I thought about it more and more, whatever one might think of that specific analogy, I really saw there were many very direct analogies related to denying people information for whatever financial reason and aspects of slavery (given we live in such a digital age now). One of the big issues with slaves were they were kept from learning reading and writing in order to keep them down, so, they had no knowledge of what was contained in written letters or passes or contracts about themselves they were commanded to carry, and they also could not alter them (so, analogies to proprietary formats, DRM and "trusted" computing, chilling effects of overly broad interpretation of copyright supressing creativity, or even regular copyright suppressing creativity, laws against circumventing DRM and such). Likewise, people are denied access to lifesaving information about medical care (copyrights), or lifesaving drugs produced for cheap (patents), which directly are killing people or causing them to suffer needlessly. Further, patents and copyright make it harder for people like us to collaborate on building a sustainable world, which causes untold suffering on humans and the natural world. So, there actually are many parallels in the general concept to the effects of slavery. Anyway, when I frame the issue in those terms, nobody complains. :-) I still feel that specific analogy above fits the circumstances of the economic interests demanding proof on their terms (RIAA, SPA), and may more and more fit the facts of daily life for sentient creatures as copyrights and patents come to cover the human genome, artificial intelligences, or even just mind-extensions like Google. --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group. To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 03:07:05 2009 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 00:07:05 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com><577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: > At 11:29 PM 8/4/2009 -0300, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote >>And I also hope laser pistols and personal energy shields are next. Damien Broderick> As an old [non-violent] street demonstrator during the Vietnam war, I > really really hope not. I can see why you wouldn't want a laser pistol, bu why not the personal shield? I can think of some non-violent uses for this. For instance it would be nice to have one last month when I broke my tibia as a result of a motorbyke accident. I also could use the Darpa instant repair right now, if already available... From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Aug 6 03:16:33 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 22:16:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds In-Reply-To: References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> At 12:07 AM 8/6/2009 -0300, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote >I can see why you wouldn't want a laser pistol, bu why not the >personal shield? Whatever one is, I rather doubt Darpa will sell it to you unless you're military, an official torturer or a cop. Being in possession of one would probably be evidence enough that you're a terrorist deserving of 1000 years in prison with no trial. E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12970 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 03:25:10 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 20:25:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds In-Reply-To: <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670908052025m77f6e542yf6f995f2e3d3b8c6@mail.gmail.com> Damien wrote: Whatever one is, I rather doubt Darpa will sell it to you unless you're military, an official torturer or a cop. Being in possession of one would probably be evidence enough that you're a terrorist deserving of 1000 years in prison with no trial. >>> A concern I have is that as personal high tech weapons/armor get more and more incredibly sophisticated and powerful, that only the military and police (across the globe) will be allowed access to them. And so as a result the common citizenry will be vulnerable to abuse, on a scale never before seen. It will be sort of like having comic book-style super heroes/villains running around. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brent.allsop at canonizer.com Thu Aug 6 03:58:20 2009 From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:58:20 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Not Evil Just Wrong Premier Night World Party. Message-ID: <4A7A54DC.5040704@canonizer.com> I think this should be a great event. Finally someone is standing up to Al Gore and showing another side of the story with a great movie. http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=249253725326 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHMOEVRysWE Is anyone else interested in this? Brent Allsop From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 05:37:53 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:07:53 +0930 Subject: [ExI] did the multiverse just get thinner? In-Reply-To: <000401ca15b4$c32c7e10$e4084797@archimede> References: <20090804164221428.ZCJF24863@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> <1249465076.31609.283.camel@localhost> <000401ca15b4$c32c7e10$e4084797@archimede> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908052237w52e7cefan377b18069c7df6cd@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/5 scerir : >> Yes. ?Usual suspects. >> http://lesswrong.com/lw/u5/how_many_lhc_failures_is_too_many/ > > it's just the misanthropic principle at work (there is no such > a principle in the other parts of the multiverse, I guess ... > http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526130.100-misanthropic-principle.html > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > "Misanthropic principle" is a nice idea, I love it. But "Anthropic Principle" means maybe the reverse of what that guy thinks it means. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 06:38:45 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:08:45 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Charter Cities Message-ID: <710b78fc0908052338y7395037dq8de8e39d0b15d801@mail.gmail.com> Paul Romer: Charter cities http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_romer.html Thoughts? -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 07:10:52 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:40:52 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds In-Reply-To: <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908060010i604eed7fs433ea70aea37c519@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/6 Damien Broderick : > At 12:07 AM 8/6/2009 -0300, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote > >> I can see why you wouldn't want a laser pistol, bu why not the personal >> shield? > > Whatever one is, I rather doubt Darpa will sell it to you unless you're > military, an official torturer or a cop. Being in possession of one would > probably be evidence enough that you're a terrorist deserving of 1000 years > in prison with no trial. > That green liquid would find uses in Guantanamo Bay, too, surely. -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 08:47:35 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 10:47:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re: RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:19 PM, spike wrote: > > >> ...On Behalf Of Alfio Puglisi >> ... >> >> But think about this: the sea level is already rising, today, >> at a rate of about 300 mm/year. ... sea level is rising anyway. >> >> Alfio > > > Did you mean micrometers per year? ?Or millimeters per millenium? > Millimeters per century? > > spike Millimeters per century. Sorry. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 09:27:15 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:27:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > >> >> You have it backwards. It's easier to predict climate over decades >> than over a few years, because random processes (weather) and >> oscillations (ENSO, etc) will average out. >> > ### Random processes average out, yes, but the systematic errors of > the model (such as CO2 sensitivity pulled out of thin air) compound. CO2 sensitivity is estimated looking at past climate trends, especially from ice core data, and how the variation of the CO2 level influenced the temperature (taking into account external forcings like solar irradiation, etc). The numbers come out at around 3?C / doubling, but there's a disturbing tail of low-probability results of 6?C/doubling or more, that does not want to go away. >> 3) "the current period of ?global cooling when it started in 1998" >> >> can you please provide a reference (with numbers) for a "global >> cooling started in 1998"? ? Plotting GISS data from 1998 to 2008 I get >> a positive slope of ?+0.0106 ?C/year, too small to be statistically >> significant given the variation of the period, but hardly evidence of >> "cooling". > > ### What do you mean by "statistically significant"? The year 1998 was > the warmest in recent history, right? It follows logically that no > year since then could have been warmer (or else it would become the > new record year). It then follows that for the last 11 years there was > a period of cooler weather, compared to 1998. A single year is not enough to establish a trend, nor a "period of cooler weather". The current period 2000-2008 is warmer than the period 1990-1999, despite the latter period including the record year. Tamino's page I linked earlier shows clearly (look at the residuals graph) that neither 1998 nor the following years were anything out of the ordinary - just random variations over a constant warming trend. http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/what-if If a new record year is what you want, just wait a few more years. > -------------------------------------- >> >>> ### Our infrastructure cannot deal with destroying fifteen or more >>> trillion dollars that would be necessary to stop anthropogenic CO2 >>> emissions. >> >> Can you please give a reference for that $15T number? Did you also >> find the cost of not stopping the CO2 emission (that is, the cost of >> adaption), and compared? > > ### Honestly? I just made it up. > > Actually, once you start looking at other estimates, it pales in > comparison - for example, Kyoto protocol cost 670 billion already, and > it might reduce warming by 0.07C. Given that most nations didn't even follow the Kyoto protocol, I find it difficult to understand how one could measure its cost. Can you give me a link for that number? How was it estimated? > As for the cost of adaptation (i.e. do nothing, even assuming global > warming is real), it has been estimated at 50 billion dollars in the > US - essentially invisible in an economy worth 50Tdollars. That depends heavily on how much warming you are expecting, and the US is among the least impacted states. Also adaptation cost goes up with time. What is the scenario for that estimate? and what year? >> >> ?why you are also sure that adding CO2 to >> the atmosphere will change nothing? > > ### I am sure there is insufficient data to make precise predictions > about climate 100 years from now. "precise" is a term that can be qualified. If you mean "precise to 0.1?C in 2100" then no, we can't to that. If you mean "precise" as discriminating between cooling, stationary and warming of at least a few ?C then yes, we can do that. > Did you read something else into my statements? Since you seem convinced that we cannot reliably predict warming for the next century, and since current CO2 levels are known to have a forcing of a few watts/m^2, it follows that you somehow assume that this forcing will have no measurable effect. > ----------------------------- > > Why do you think that the change >> will be smaller than the IPCC says and not, for example, much higher? > > ### The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one, therefore > their results can be treated as propaganda rather than science. IPCC reports are a summary of current scientific research. If you don't believe it, there's nothing I can do, except encouraging you to read it and cross-check its statements with current scientific research. Alfio From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Thu Aug 6 13:37:02 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 13:37:02 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph In-Reply-To: <20090804181020.Y24QH.368214.root@hrndva-web20-z01> Message-ID: <20090806133702.XM446.390715.root@hrndva-web02-z01> When using the tanh() function to map the time-technology curve for a species, not as most Transhumanist speak of it as a representation of a civilization, there are several additional aspects that become usefull. The first is the use of the 'height' of the curve being a relative representation of 'intelligence' or 'technological capability' (it's not clear they are the same). Consider all species, microbe to man, start out at 0,0 (or some convenient point for discussion) and they develop as time progresses, or they go extinct. This means at some point in the far future the line becomes a negative edge step function to zero. The 'success' of that species is the length of time from the positive going tanh() step to the negative going edge. Now for any species the maximum technology they can attain is a function of their cerebral 'efficiency' at using the physical environment around them and understanding it in an abstract manner. This means that a 'technology map' for a volumetric space (eg our solar system) is actually a multi-threaded set of tanh() progressing in parallel with different tanh() and negative going steps spread across the time axis. That difference in height can be considered an 'intelligence quotient' k, this means our actual curve is k*tanh(). We can assume for convenience, and hubris, that k=1 for mankind. Note that this value can shift, or we allow k>1, as multiple species of of advanced technology begin to share the same volumetric space. This is usually a result of exploration and population settlement. Consider that were we to meet a more advanced species their k would either be set to 1 or some multiple greater than. The choice, while at this point seeming academic, can in fact play a major factor in the way we model events past that point of intersection. One can model the above hypothesis in the small by looking at human history and our explorations. Find two groups/civilizations that were seperated by geography and model their individual volumetric space. Then move those two spaces until they meet and merge their spaces. Several good examples come to mind. - The expansion of mankind into N. America at the last Ice Age - The expansion of China and the Middle East - The exploration of the Spanish into N. America With regard to tracking a given volumetric space, say our solar system, we then have a 'point' that moves along the curve. That point expands into a multi-axis representation of that volumetric space. In our case it would be a 3D model of the position of the planets and other objects with respect to time. At each point in that space there would be a tag (really one or more additional axis of a phase space) we can use to measure the 'technology level' for that voxel. We want to include our entire solar system because we have various probes and plans to probe that space in the near future. As time goes by that space will grow. When/if we were to meet another species then their space and ours would merge, as would the various phase spaces assigned to each voxel of that space. ---- jameschoate at austin.rr.com wrote: > This is one of my 'little red buttons' about transhumanism and and the marketing drone approach that so many take, it simply isn't based on any science. > > It's clear that things can be exponential only in the short term. It is also clear that many technological advances can only go so far because they bump into a plethora of impossibility theorems. In short they ignore the 3 Laws of Thermodynamics in such a bold, and completely unchallenged way it has always boggled my mind. > > To borrow from Heinz Pagels; > > 1. You can never get ahead > 2. You can never break even > 3. The first two rules -always- apply > > The curve we need to be looking at is tanh() and not straight exponentials. The way to present that curve is from a population dynamic perspective as well. Along the horizontal is time going from 'beginning of mankind' at the origin and proceeding to the right (effectively to infinity. The vertical axis should really be a measure of the effectiveness of a given population to use technology. To be at the origin is simply stating that the populations are not using any tools, don't communicate in any long termed manner, and don't have a mechanism to record their individual experiences. In general there are three fundamental populations: > > - an arbitrary individual > - the general population > - the ruling/decision making population once these sorts of economic/political technologies are developed > > At the beginning all three are at the same point. As time progressed they began to separate in such a way that the technology available to each group became clearly distinct. The individual is usually at the bottom having control of the last technology. The general population has a higher technology but below the ruling/decision making group. As we approach the top of the curve the three groups begin to remerge. My suspicion is that this will impact the economic/political technologies first with regard to how people use and relate to the new technologies they have and now have the ability to develop on their own. "The street has it's own uses for technology". > We can actually see the very beginning of this as we see the rise of 5th generation warfare and the 'asymmetric warfare' tactics. The truth is they're not asymmetric at all with regard to availability, only with regard to population size regarding who gets to use them. Another examples is the current turmoil in the agora with regard to the agalmic, intellectual property in particular. For many centuries (but remember not that many) the party line has been that we must protect the inventions and products of certain individuals in order to give them value. This destruction of the artificial value placed on the agalmic will cause a fundamental shift in the value of human thought and production. It will reduce it to one of equity and the technology will allow artificial structures to be identified and frustrated at earlier and earlier times. The end result is that while nobody will go hungy, everybody will have to produce for themselves in the local community to obtain value. A sort of ultimate think globally, act locally effect. Value will return to actually solving your neighbors problems rather than marketing solutions to somebody elses neighbors. The plethora of ethical and philosophical views we have are only going to increase as time goes by. Because of the organic social perspective (ie village) of individuals and the clear incompatibility of some of these views ("Why can't we all just get along" is dead) leads to another observation. That people will create zaibatsu/arcologies based around particular perspectives and not resource geography. The most obvious question is why they won't destroy each other, and the answer is that because the level of available technology is equal and the potential to keep secrets for a significant time (ie sufficient to obtain tactical if not strategic advantage from game theoretic perspective) is nil. What is the likely outcome of two groups who can control their immediate resources via nanotech and communications architectures at the atomic level? The parity leads to stalemate and isolation unless the parties as a group want to commit suicide. > > Another aspect, with regard to how does one predict specific characteristics and possibly even short term events, is currently almost unstudied, except for government/economic sponsored groups. One good example is Bruce Bueno De Mequita's work. This sort of analysis has been called Cliology after the Muse for history Clio. > > Candidate - Fundamental Theorems of Cliology > > These are candidates only, they are intended to foster focused discussion. Consider them incomplete both within individual suppositions as well as the complete set as a whole. > > Cliology is the study of history. However, it is more analytical and predictive than what one normally considers history. It is distinct (at least in my mind) from other studies like Asimov's Psychohistory because it is not as cosmological in scope. There is also the distinction of 'scale of resolution'. Psychohistory postulates that it may be possible to predict future events to the point of detailing specifics about individuals who will arise as a consequence of these formative forces. Cliology approaches the situation more as statistical mechanical and stochastic in nature. > > Fundamental Theorem of Cliology > > Who get's to make the choices? > > What are the permissible choices? > > The first two are auto-catalytic > > The study of what decissions were or weren't made and why, both with respect to individual as well as larger scale motivations is critical to understanding a society in a particular time scale > > Understanding the ecology and environs of a society is critical to understanding social statics and dynamics > > Cliometric Uncertainty Principle > > It is not possible to predict with any degree of accuracy or certainty the presence or actions of future events at the level of the individual. > Because of the interplay of a multitude of forces the 'standard model' of Cliology is somewhat akin to a 'gas' model. In this case this means that we can predict 'averages' and 'trends' of potential behaviour based upon the characteristics of the individuals taken (only) in large groups. > > Definition of Society > > The cornerstones of any society are > > toleration > > self-defence > > A set of rules, codified or not, and expectations, expressed or not, which regulate both the individual and inter-personal activities of same > > > Societies may be radically different in content and yet share the same geography > > The statics and dynamics of a society are governed by the physics of reality and the psychology of the individual (and it's absolute range) > > The expectations of societies can be in direct opposition > > Violence does not ensue from opposition but from lack of toleration of opposition > > This applies to all levels of societies and seems to be psychology independent (in other words, all life seems to follow it) > > As a result, stability can be looked upon as a measure of tolerance > > Hypothesis: > > With respect to the last item above, does this mean that societies which are most stable are the ones which tolerate the most? Can the inverse be said, that intolerant societies tend, statistically at least, to last a shorter period of time? > > Fundamental Axiom of Government > > Government is technology > > The bounding constraints are: > > Psychology > > Resources > > Environment/Ecology > > Definition of 'crime' > > Any act which harms a person, their property, or breaks a public trust without consent > > What is a 'public trust'? > > A contract entered voluntarily (at the point one questions the compliance but complies they have consented - no expectation of continued consent is implied) to provide service to the community or use a public resource > > What is a 'public resource'? > > A resource which is common to all and is required for basic individual survival or social operations > > Fundamental Axiom of Law > > The codification of social rules, commonly called 'rule of law', is an extension of the right to self-defence > > A defining characteristic of any society is to whom the 'right' falls to (ie some mix of individual or group) > > A fundamental defining character is whether the rights of society extend from the individual, or rather the rights of the individual stem from the population > > Definition of Civil Liberty > > The ability to make 'a choice' with respect to individual or classes of decisions > > This is the primary defining character of any human society or relationship > > Definition of Derivation > > There is an observable imbalance in the definitions of civil liberty and where they come from. > > A 'society' is a collection of individuals, but an individual is self-supporting. > > In other words you can take 'society' away from 'people', but you can't take 'people' away from 'society'. > > When one speaks of the 'good of society' one must also, as a consequence, speak of the 'good of the individual'. It follows logically that to maximize one requires maximizing the other. Society may not be considered succesful if its individuals are unsatisfied. > > Hypothesis: > > Can a correlation between societal longevity and the relative importance of rights derivation be drawn? What other factors are important (eg freedom to associate)? > > Definition of Causal Effect > > When one speaks of human societies you are faced with a multitude of potential decisions and effects. One observation is that simply because something works doesn't mean it is the best solution. > > People will often impliment sub-optimal solutions, sometimes to their greater detriment, because of psychological drives. > > With respect to human psychology, our societies will be governed more by how one feels it should work than any cosmological input (eg law of physics). People will tend to select choices related to how it 'should' work even when faced with strong arguments to the contrary. > > Definition of Cliological Metric Spaces > > Metric spaces with respect to studying societies are complicated and multi-valued. They contain a variety of metric scales (eg binary v discrete v linear) whose point of interest may itself be a metric space. > > The mathematical and economic concept of 'rational' is suspect because it fails to take into account psychology and environmental factors of indirect affect. > > Different agents faced with identical situations may choose different solutions. Two 'rational' agents reviewing the same data may come to radically different (even opposed) views based on issues other than strict fact. > > There is no one 'right way'. Because of the relativity of right and wrong all considerations must make reference to the statistical nature of the actors. > > A fundamental concept of Cliology is the statistical mechanical character of human societies. In contrast to many other sciences (eg economics) inter-actions between players is considered a given. Each actor does not act in isolation to their community. > > Each agent in a model should be considered a multi-dimensional data structure. Different agents may have different internal structures and interfaces. Any interaction between one set of agent characteristics and another agents set must follow defined conversion algorithms. These algorithms are not necessarily loss-less or available (ie some agents can't talk to other agents because they don't have a communications process). > > Expect behaviours to be self-similar. > > Central Position of Graph Theory to Cliology > > Because of the dependencies of one agent on others the concepts of graph theory are important for building a basic description of any society. It is the prime mechanism to demonstrate dependency and weighting. > > It's compatible with the cellular automaton model of individual agents without considerations or dependencies upon the particular models for those agents. > > The theory of 'small world networks' or '6 DoF - aka Kevin Bacon game' is critical to understanding the higher level exchanges as well as the analysis of emergent behaviours. > > The Cliological Cosmological Space - The Central Spaces Axiom > > The present and future has a dependency on the past. All global models must have a time axis. > > There is a homogenous and isomorphic metric space we all live in, a shared cosmos. This should be the fundamental space for cliological studies. It automatically allows easy inclusion of almost all other human studies as components of a larger model. > > The sorts of tools used for GIS (eg location, component, value) are of critical importance to build models of context and ecology. > It is important to always keep the seperation between psychology and ecology primary in ones mind. > > This seperation in effect creates two metric spaces (ie ecological and psychological) connected through common labels (ie tags to agent data spaces). > > Observation On Available Societal Information > > Since the mid-1990's it has become possible to not only obtain large amounts of detailed or fine-grained information about individuals, but also to apply pattern matching, signature analysis, and traffic analysis to it. The critical factor in this was the growth of computers and networks of same. Currently the groups who have the access are government and financial institutions acting through combining organizations like FINCEN. The primary justification for this is crime enforcement (re tolerance of opposition). > > There is considerable concern that such solitary access will have a negative impact on the stability of the society. In particular with regards the concepts of 'democracy', 'personal liberty' and 'privacy'. > > Note: these terms and related terms need to be better defined within this framework, a future effort. > > From a cliological perspective this represents a data set of sufficient size and detail to corrolate with GIS and population statistics in a meaningful way. > > ---- Tom Nowell wrote: > > > This reminds me of arguments used regarding the singularity - The existence of Moore's law is used to draw an exponential graph showing accelerating processing > > power. Another graph is used to show the pace of human technological progress (and by picking points of progress suitably, an accelerating rate of progress is shown). > Accelerating computing power + accelerating gadget development is used to demonstrate the possibility of ever-accelerating technological change leading to a colossal > rate of change where a singularity occurs and we can only guess at what lies beyond. > > > On the other hand, you could draw graphs picking different points and argue the pace of change is not so rapid (such as Max More's concept of "The Surge" if progress > is not exponential) or even follow Mike Darwin's idea of looking at graphs of medical developments (if less drugs and medical devices are being presented to the FDA, > > guardians of the most lucrative healthcare market on earth, then is biomedical progress slowing?). Like the climate change arguments of "but you're assuming CO2 is > > the important factor", it can be argued "but you're assuming raw processing power is the important factor in developing artificial general intelligence". > > Now this certainly doesn't address all aspects and one important one is the psychology of the individual and the populations they participate in. One defining characteristic of human psychology has to do with transcendence. Humanity as a whole, and for the vast majority of individuals, struggle to find a description of their existence that is beyond them. This is probably the biggest ideological hurdle we as a race, and as individuals, have to face. As the available 'wiggle room' between what we see and think we see, and what we know through empirical evidence widens we'll see many belief systems go away. An important question is what will replace them? I'll assume that one defining character is the abandonment of transcendence. Are there any such examples, however crude, extant now? Pantheism (and I don't mean Scientific Pantheism or any of the marketing droid remakes of same out there). > > > 4-22-08 > > The Edge: Breaking the Galilean Spell (Stuart A. Kauffman) > > This article makes some excellent points and I'm currently reviewing it for concept inclusion and rebutt. > > We are part of Nature as a whole whose order we follow. > > Spinoza, 1673 > > What is Pantheism? > > Pantheism is the belief that everything is divine, that God is not seperate but totaly indentified with the Cosmos. It is a doctrine that holds God exists not as a person or personality; but is manifested in the material cosmos, including man and every other natural object. It further refutes the potential of transcendence and super-natural possibilities. It views such beliefs as a result of the psychology of the observer and not any sort of absolute representation of nature and its interactions. It is the understanding that the Cosmos has two components, Physics and Psychology. > > In one sentence Pantheism can be summed up: > > Pantheism is the abandonment of Transcendence > > Some related Pantheism URL's: > > It should be noted that inclusion in this list does not imply agreement by the author, as in most human activity there are disagreements. > > Stanford Philosophy Server > > What is Pantheism? > > Another definition one might use is [Dictionary of Theories (ISBN 1-57859-045-0)]: > > Literally 'all-god-ism'. The view that God and the universe are identical; or that there is no transcendent God outside the universe who created it, but the universe itself is divine. Among philosophers, Baruch de Spinoza (1632-77) is as prominent exponent of such a view, and it appears also in Stoicism. The term itself was coined in 1705 by Irish writer John Toland (1670-1722). > > Pantheism and traditional religions and philosophies > > Pantheism is a very mechanistic view of reality. It doesn't hold with ghosts in the machine or other similar forces. Pantheism is at odds with all other religions. This does not mean that there are not shared concepts, but when one looks at the total picture Pantheism is clearly distinct from all other world views. This creates problems for many as they want to see it as a different shade rather than a different color. > > Besides the concept of transcendence there is the concept of peace. All religions promise peace and tranquility if the practitioner only tries hard enough, and in the right way. > > There is no peace to be had, the cosmos is a fundamentaly violent place. Struggle is inherent in existance be it a rock, a rabbit, or a person. It is only the nature of the struggle that is different. A Pantheist understands that it is their anthropocentricism and the limits of their psychology that colors their interpretation of the Cosmos. To borrow an observation from Quantum Physics, > > The Cosmos is observer dependent. > > Fundamentally pantheism recognizes that all beliefs are faith. That concepts such as absolute truth don't exist outside of observer independant events (e.g. meteor strikes planet, kills all life). Pantheism holds that even science is itself only a religion since it is based upon a small set of beliefs which are unprovable. Science as we know it, however perfectly practiced, is colored by our psychology. It is important to recognize that this observation does not in any way decrease the utility of science in understanding the cosmos. > > It is also worth mentioning specifically that science is fundamentaly different than other philosophies (other than Pantheism) because it accepts , at least in principle, it's basic axioms are open to change or nullification. > > Unlike other religions, pantheism does not address the actual understability of the cosmos by any observer. It is a matter of individual psychology and faith. The actual degree of comprehension of the Cosmos by an individual or a group is open to interpretation. > > The meaning of Life, or why are we here? > > Pantheism does not recognize a seperation of the human experience from the remainder of the cosmos. That the universe ponders itself is fundamentaly irrelevant. Is the universe alive? Yes, so far as we define the biochemistry on this little ball of mud alive. It is a self referential, and useless, point. Is the universe intelligent, only so far as we and other lifeforms are intelligent by our definition. It is also recognized that intelligence is after all a human concept and may in fact have no validity outside of human psychology. > > We decide what the meaning of life is by living it. To borrow a poem from the Chinese text The Mtsao, > > You are > What you do > When it counts > > To add one further observation, as individuals or as a race, we seldom have any input in to when it will count. Most individuals and groups take far more credit than they are due, they underestimate and disrespect the power of chance. > > The Cosmos is autocatalytic > > The Cosmos exists because if it didn't there wouldn't be one to ponder. Even if the Cosmos as we see it today came from nothing, that nothing is still something. This problem is more likely a reflection of the emotional state and needs of the observer than a valid commentary on the character of the cosmos. > > Tools such as Gaian ecology or Complexity Theory are generaly well received by pantheist since, contrary to the typical western deconstructionalism, they also consider the whole system to reach understanding. One must look at both the nature of the components as well as the system in which those components exist. Emergent behavior is often not concerned with the actual mechanism of existance but rather the potential number of different states that system can take on, and how it might change from one state to another. > > Pantheism and Society > > Pantheist tend to be very literal and practical. Conformity is not their strong suite because they recognize that much of accepted canon is actualy just opinion, and in may cases there are better ways. They also tend to be active in their beliefs. If they don't do it, who will? There is no higher power to plead their case to. > > The point to life, if it can be said to have one, is to live. Hopefully so you can ask questions like this to pass the time between birth and death. If not then it's to stay alive long enough to procreate. This is clearly an aspect of the psychology of the observer and their mental state. > > The Two Ways of The One > > There are two ways to Pantheism. Another striking difference between Pantheism and almost all other human viewpoints. It leaves the choice up to the individual. It further conflicts with the ideas of good and evil as held by the majority. It recognizes that such concepts are relative and not absolute. > > The group way is to recognize the fundmamental equality of all things and conserve resources and tend toward cooperative behaviour. > > The individual way is to recognize the fundamental equality of all things and to use them to foster individual existence. > > Either are equally valid approaches, neither has a superiority over the other. In mosts situations, the individuals choices will be somewhere between these two poles. Most people find this aspect of Pantheism to be very hard to accept. People want an answer, not a choice. The choice is where one stands between the extremes of the group or the individual. It is in direct odds with human nature. Pantheist believe in the fundamental equality of all things, which stems from the belief that all things are fundamentally one, the Cosmos. Distinctions are put there by human psychology and our incomplete understanding of what is there and how it fits together. The impact of Pantheist thought on modern political and social culture is in its infancy. The abandonment of transcendence coupled with a sense of absolute equality does not bode well for the status quo. > > There are no women rights or gay rights, only human rights within the context of a shared belief system. If one person may do it, then any person may do it. For any healthy workable society we must recognize the fundamental nature of the human animal. The Choice must reside with the individual in all cases. Communities, governments, and authority are emergent behaviours of individuals following a varied set of goals, attempting to work in groups. Eventually we will see that the primary lesson of the 20th century is that governments and groups can't be allowed bo break eggs. It will certainly come at a price even larger than the 100+ Million who have died over the last century for no other reason than one group can't tolerate the thoughts and beliefs of another. > > Another observation that will eventually become apparent to the masses is that government and economics are nothing more than another sort of technology. They are not inherent in the human condition, simply a solution to a problem that was developed by our ancestors and their limited experiences. They are simply a solution to the problem of survival in a Cosmos ruled by supply and demand. This will lead to the realization that they can be abandoned for other solutions. An interesting acceptance of this is the concept of Fifth Generation Warfare. > > The Good and The Bad, both are Ugly > > Pantheism does not recognize any concept of good or bad, outside the context of the human psychology. It is this little bit of the Cosmos reflecting upon itself that provides the context. A Pantheist would not see a fundamental wrong in killing a rabbit, a human, or the entire planet. Only within the context of a society does value become to have meaning. It further observes that the question of whether it is worse to kill one or one million is fundamentaly a smoke screen. It is asked in the context of a human society and the precepts and limits that sociiety assumes and accepts. > > A Pantheism may come to realize that there is another solution to the problem of which side one stands on within the context of a social problem. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play the game. > > Pantheism and Ecology > > Pantheism does not foster any sort of respect or motive to preserve the ecology or environment. If one examines the cosmos we find the destruction of life on grand scales to have occurred many times. There can be no fundamental support of ecological or environmental activism outside the human psychology. It is our own hubric anthropocentricism which colors our every act. If anything the remains of one act of destruction leave resources for a new act of creation. > > However, it is clear that we do have a responsibility to protect our own self interests. This leads one to use resources according to one strategy or another. An individualist Pantheist would likely look at it very short term. Whereas a Pantheist more concerned with group survival would take the long, or deep time perspective. It is suspected that the deep time perspective has the least negative side effects due to the simple concept of conservationism. > > Divinity and Sacred > > For many people raised in traditional religious societies the concept of divine or sacred seem to be problematic. In truth they're pretty simple to understand from a Pantheists view. Divine means to be part of God. Since Pantheism's primary tenet that all is God there is no possible conflict. Unlike the traditional religious view no distinction between the thing being divine and God can occur since they are unity. > > Sacred on the other hand means to set aside for or use in religious purposes. It implies a seperation between the transcendental and the mundane. Pantheism abandons transcendence and seperatism in this context, all is unity. A Pantheist does't recognize the concept of sacred as anything but confused. > > One way to describe the Pantheist creedo is, > > If you find a sacred cow, have a bar-b-que! > > Pantheism and Toleration > > Pantheist tend to be tolerant of other belief systems and their practice so long as no coercion is encountered. Since all is one, other beliefs are accepted as possible, but not necessarily practical or even workable. We also recognize that people will try to make things work instead of admitting they wont work and finding other solutions. > > In cases of violence Pantheist tend toward pragmatism. Avoidance is the best strategy. The alternate is to do whatever will reduce the future occurance of this event as well as maximizing the participants, all of them if given a choice, chance of escaping from the confrontation. This of course is the group side. The individual side responce may be to nuke them until they glow, and then shoot them in the dark. > > No Pantheist can be a pacifist (violence is inherent in the Cosmos), some are non-violent. The distinction being whether force is used as a means to an ends, or simply in self-defense. > > The group Pantheist does not accept the belief that the ends justify the means (The Law of Unintended Consequences). Each action must justify itself. To try to say that some small evil justifies the greater good only tarnishes the concept of geater good. It reduces the concept from a principle to an expedient. > > The strict individualist Pantheist on the other hand would, in principle at least, cut your throat as soon as look at you if there were a profit to be made. > > Some thoughts on Intelligence > > It is important to realize that the intelligence refered to is not two people but two distinct races or brain morphologies. A regular table represents the totality of rules and interactions that compose the Cosmos. Each intelligence be it man, microbe, or alien from Alpha Centauri is represented by potato chip lids (a physical representation of a Venn Diagram).: > > Assume that the table top is the set of all possible laws and interactions that can describe the Cosmos. The lids represent the sets of laws that allow intelligence in some form or other. > > The questions that we'll pose are: > > Is the set of fundamental relations and interactions limited or infinite? Is the area of the table fixed or infinite? The author thinks they are limited. This leads to the realization that at some point know all there is to know. The question then becomes whether this is enough for us to build our own cosmos'? > > Is there a necessity for any two intelligences to have at least some overlap? > > If so, is this overlap a result of the laws of physics allowing only certain classes of intelligence? Are there fundamental physical rules for intelligence all must share? > > Or, is it a result of the potential that if the two intellegences don't overlap it may not be possible for them to even recognize each other as intelligent. > > Or, is it pure chance that an overlap occurs at all, and that intellegence can in fact be recognizable (ie symmetry breaking) irrespective of the set membership? Are there commen characteristics (ie emergent behaviors) that all intelligences share irrespective of their base set? > > Also, for a given intelligence set is it a requirement for that set to include self-understanding? In other words, can it be such that the set of rules that allow intelligence prohibit self-understanding at some fundamental level? > > Or, is it a pot-luck dinner in that one life form may be able to succesfully understand itself at the fundamental level (ie could at least in theory build itself) while another is forever going to miss the mark because it simply can't comprehend the relations? > > Now these same sorts of questions can be extended to the study of what 'life' is. As a result we are faced with the potential of different 'sets' of life and parallel consequences. > > What is the relationship between these /intelligence sets/ and the totality of member rules? Is it possible for a limited set to comprehend the entire set at least in theory? > > If not, then what are the limitations of any given sets boundary? > > How would one set explain to another set some aspect that the second set could not understand as a result of its set membership? This is another way to express Clarke's Law > > In regard to AI, if the set of necessary rules for intelligence are in fact fixed is it possible to embody those rules in a mechanism of a non-biological nature? > > These last two lead to some very hairy questions regarding the way we as humans treat animals and potentialy AI's as well as cloning. > > If the set is not fixed or can be embodied in non-biological systems then do we have a 'being' that is due the same respect as ourselves? > > Is it the intelligence or the set of rules that matter as far as moral and ethical issues are concerned? > > An example of faith in science > > The author was posed the following question, > > If identical oxygen atoms (at the same temperature, velocity, etc.) are fundamentally the SAME, (meaning that they could change places and we could know no difference), then information is necessarily destroyed. > > How can that be unless the atoms themselves are different? If they are the same they should have the same information and ability to store the same potential levels. Otherwise they are dis-similar and we are in contradiction to your assumptions. In fact, once swapped how would you determine the swap had even taken place unless they were different? Once the swap had taken place the only thing *proving* the swap ever took place would the experimenters faith in the swap. It would be untestable. > -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 14:11:17 2009 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:11:17 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com><577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook><20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com><20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <2d6187670908052025m77f6e542yf6f995f2e3d3b8c6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: John Grigg>>A concern I have is that as personal high tech weapons/armor get more and more incredibly sophisticated and >>powerful, that only the military and police (across the globe) will be >>allowed access to them. >>And so as a result the common citizenry will be vulnerable to abuse, on a >>scale never before seen. >>It will be sort of like having comic book-style super heroes/villains >>running around. A valid concern. But advanced weapons will happen. If not by Darpa, by someone else. I don't see how it can be prevented. But advanced weapons or the lack of them is not related to abuse of citizenry in my POV. See the brittish government for instance which seems to be bent on turning England into an orwellian state. From jonkc at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 6 14:37:16 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 10:37:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com><4902d9990908040122k72b4f715k36fbe5b35a32c0ee@mail.gmail.com><11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer><4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com><03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer><4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com><2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908051123h74322e64t348ebb0499d1cb79@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: "Alfio Puglisi" >>> only took a century or two, and [CO2] will go much higher in another >>> one. Me: >> How the hell do you know? > I thought it was obvious. You thought how the atmosphere works is obvious? You thought the new energy sources that will be developed in the next century were obvious? You thought it was obvious that we should waste valuable brain cells worrying about problems that won't become serious for a century or more if they ever do? > current policy goals are thinking of 450 or 500 ppm, > which is already pretty higher than now I don't know where you got those "goals" but even the higher figure would only be about a sixth of the average CO2 concentration in the air over the last 600 million years. Environmentalists want us to panic over this, and that part really is obvious, after all panic is how environmentalists make their living. By the way let me ask you something, which do you think kills more people, heatstroke or freezing to death? I don't know about you but I'm far from certain that this is the ideal temperature. John K Clark From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 14:49:17 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:49:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908051123h74322e64t348ebb0499d1cb79@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908060749s9d6ab63v39c482be7d2f9a67@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:37 PM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >>>> only took a century or two, and [CO2] will go much higher in another >>>> one. > > Me: >>> >>> How the hell do you know? > >> I thought it was obvious. > > You thought how the atmosphere works is obvious? No, I thought that more CO2 emissions in the next decades are obvious. Unless you postulate some unknown sink of CO2 that will kick in at the right time, a higher concentration follows. > By the way let me ask you something, which do you think kills more people, > heatstroke or freezing to death? I don't know about you but I'm far from > certain that this is the ideal temperature. Global warming of some ?C will have little effect on both. I don't think i have ever expressed concerns about heatstrokes. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 14:49:39 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:49:39 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908051123h74322e64t348ebb0499d1cb79@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I am quite sick tired of you Afosiuo, and all other climate change alarmists. I'll have to pay you 30 ? in next 4 years. Doe to the Kyoto accord, my stupid country officials have signed. Yet, you are making elementary mistakes and are totally unable to explain where form the alleged sea water is coming from. So, I am asking you once more. Where is the mighty Antarctic river? Filling up the Ocean? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 16:06:51 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:06:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Edge 296: George Church-Craig Venter Master Class on Synthetic Genomics; Edge Summer Reading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55ad6af70908060906h38f58391v999a087bfa17402d@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Scott Kerr Date: Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:00 AM Subject: Fwd: Edge 296: George Church-Craig Venter Master Class on Synthetic Genomics; Edge Summer Reading To: diybio at googlegroups.com 6 hours of talks by Church and Venter.? I haven't watched yet but should be interesting. http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge296.html Scott ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Edge Date: Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:05 AM Subject: Edge 296: George Church-Craig Venter Master Class on Synthetic Genomics; Edge Summer Reading To: Scott Kerr Edge 296 - August 5, 2009 (7,000 words) http://www.edge.org This online EDGE edition with streaming video is available at: http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge296.html ---------------------------------------------------- THE THIRD CULTURE ---------------------------------------------------- EDGE SUMMER READING Recent and forthcoming titles from Edge Contributors Chris Anderson, W. Brian Arthur, John Barrow, Thomas Bass, Jeremy Bernstein, Susan Blackmore. Stewart Brand, John Brockman, Max Brockman, David Buss, Nicholas Christakis, Andy Clarke, Gregory Cochran,Jack Cohen, Jerry Coyne, Richard Dawkins, Stanislas Dehaene, Keith Devlin, Denis Dutton, Freeman Dyson, David Eagleman, Todd Feinberg, James Fowler, Howard Gardner, Anthony Giddens, Daniel Goleman, Alison Gopnik, Susan Greenfield, Haim Harari, Henry Harpendening, Gerald Holton, Nicholas Humphrey, George Johnson, Steven Johnson, Stephen H Kellert, Marek Kohn, Ray Kurzweil, Jaron Lanier, Jonah Lehrer, John McWhorter, Thomas Metzinger, Oliver Morton, David G. Myers, Richard E. Nisbett, Alva Noe, Hans Ulrich Obrist, Dean Ornish, John Allen Paulos, Alex (Sandy) Pentland, Irene M. Pepperberg, Clifford Pickover, David G. Post, Douglas Rushkoff, Karl Sabbagh, Scott Sampson, Al Seckel, Clay Shirky, Gavin Schmidt, Tom Standage, Bruce Sterling, Ian Stewart, Steven Strogatz, Colin Tudge, She rry Turkle, Antony Valentini, E.O. Wilson, Lewis Wolpert, Richard Wrangham, Carl Zimmer [MORE...] ---------------------------------------------------- A SHORT COURSE ON SYNTHETIC GENOMICS Edge Master Class 2009 George Church & J. Craig Venter On July 24, 2009, a small group of scientists, entrepreneurs, cultural impresarios and journalists that included architects of the some of the leading transformative companies of our time (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, PayPal), arrived at the Andaz Hotel on Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood, to be offered a glimpse, guided by George Church and Craig Venter, of a future far stranger than Mr. Huxley had been able to imagine in 1948. In this future -- whose underpinnings, as Drs. Church and Venter demonstrated, are here already -- life as we know it is transformed not by the error catastrophe of radiation damage to our genetic processes, but by the far greater upheaval caused by discovering how to read genetic sequences directly into computers, where the code can be replicated exactly, manipulated freely, and translated back into living organisms by writing the other way. "We can program these cells as if they were an extension of the computer," George Church announced, and proceeded to explain just how much progress has already been made. ... -- George Dyson, from The Introduction GEORGE CHURCH, Professor of Genetics at Harvard Medical School and Director, Center for Computational Genetics, and Science Advisor to 23 and Me, and J. CRAIG VENTER, Founder of Synthetic Genomics, Inc. and President of the J. Craig Venter Institute and the J. Craig Venter Science Foundation, taught the Edge Master Class 2009: "A Short Course In Synthetic Genomics" at The Andaz Hotel in West Hollywood, the weekend of July 24th-26th. On Saturday the 25th the class traveled by bus to Space X near LAX, where Sessions 1-4 were taught by George Church. On Sunday, the Class was held at The Andaz in West Hollywood. Craig Venter taught Session 5 and George Church taught Session 6. The topics covered over the course of a rigorous 2-day progam of six lectures included: What is life, origins of life, in vitro synthetic life, mirror-life, metabolic engineering for hydrocarbons & pharmaceuticals, computational tools, electronic-biological interfaces, nanotech-molecular-manufacturing, biosensors, accelerated lab evolution, engineered personal stem cells, multi-virus-resistant cells, humanized-mice, bringing back extinct species, safety/security policy. The entire Master Class is available online in high quality HD Edge Video (about 6 hours). THE CLASS Stewart Brand, Biologist, Long Now Foundation; Whole Earth Discipline Larry Brilliant, M.D. Epidemiologist, Skoll Urgent Threats Fund John Brockman, Publisher & Editor, Edge Max Brockman, Literary Agent, Brockman, Inc.; What's Next: Dispatches on the Future of Science Jason Calacanis, Internet Entrepreneur, Mahalo George Dyson, Science Historian; Darwin Among the Machines Jesse Dylan, Film-Maker, Form.tv, FreeForm.tv Arie Emanuel, William Morris Endeavor Entertainment Sam Harris, Neuroscientist, UCLA; The End of Faith W. Daniel Hillis, Computer Scientist, Applied Minds; Pattern On The Stone Thomas Kalil, Deputy Director for Policy for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Senior Advisor for Science, Technology and Innovation for the National Economic Council Salar Kamangar, Vice President, Product Management, Google Lawrence Krauss, Physicist, Origins Initiative, ASU; Hiding In The Mirror John Markoff, Journalist, The New York Times; What The Dormouse Said Katinka Matson, Cofounder, Edge; Artist, katinkamatson.com Elon Musk, Physicist, SpaceX, Tesla Motors Nathan Myhrvold, Physicist, CEO, Intellectual Ventures, LLC, The Road Ahead Tim O'Reilly, Founder, O'Reilly Media, O'Reilly Radar Larry Page, CoFounder, Google Lucy Page Southworth, Biomedical Informatics Researcher, Stanford Sean Parker, The Founders Fund; CoFounder Napster & Facebook Ryan Phelan, Founder, DNA Direct Nick Pritzker, Hyatt Development Corporation Ed Regis, Writer; What Is Life Terrence Sejnowski, Computational Neurobiologist, Salk; The Computational Brain Maria Spiropulu, Physicist, Cern & Caltech Victoria Stodden, Computational Legal Scholar, Yale Law School Nassim Taleb, Essayist & Risk Engineer, The Black Swan Richard Thaler, Behavioral Economist, U. Chicago; Nudge Craig Venter, Genomics Researcher; CEO, Synthetic Genomics, A Life Decoded Nathan Wolfe, Biologist, Global Virus Forecasting Initiative Alexandra Zukerman, Edge [MORE...] ---------------------------------------------------- THE REALITY CLUB ---------------------------------------------------- Tim O'Reilly, Ed Regis, Victoria Stodden, Jesse Dylan, George Dyson, Alexandra Zukerman on "A Short Course on Synthetic Genomics" TIM O'REILLY Founder, O'Reilly Media, O'Reilly Radar George Church asked "Is life a qualitative or quantitative question?" Every revolution in science has come when we learn to measure and count rather than asking binary qualitative questions. Church didn't mention phlogiston, but it's what came to mind as a good analogy. Heat is not the presence or absence of some substance or quality, but rather a measurable characteristic of a complex thermodynamic system. Might not the same be true of life? ... ED REGIS Writer; What Is Life? Almost fifteen years ago, in a profile of Leroy Hood, I quoted Bill Gates, who said: "The gene is by far the most sophisticated program around." ... At the Edge Master Class last weekend I learned the extent to which we are now able to reprogram, rework, and essentially reinvent the gene. This gives us a degree of control over biological organisms -- as well as synthetic ones -- that was considered semi-science fictional in 1995. Back then scientists had genetically engineered E. coli bacteria to produce insulin. ... VICTORIA STODDEN Computational Legal Scholar, Yale Law School Craig Venter posed the question whether it is possible to reconstruct life from its constituent parts. Although he's come close, he hasn't done it (yet?) and neither has anyone else. Aside from the intrinsic interest of the question, its pursuit seems to be changing biological research in two fundamental ways encapsulated Venter's own words ... JESSE DYLAN Film-Maker, Form.tv, FreeForm.tv What a revelation the The Master Class in Synthetic Genomics was. In addition to being informative on so many literal levels it reinforced the mystery and wonder of the world. George Church and Craig Venter were generous to give us a glimpse of where we are today and fire the imagination of where we are going. It's all science but seems beyond science fiction -- living forever, reprogramming genes, resurrecting extinct species. ... GEORGE DYSON Science Historian; Darwin Among the Machines We speak of reading and writing genomes -- but no human mind can comprehend these lengthy texts. We are limited to snippet view in the library of life. As Edge's own John Markoff reported from the recent Asilomar conference on artificial intelligence, the experts "generally discounted the possibility of highly centralized superintelligences and the idea that intelligence might spring spontaneously from the Internet." ... ALEXANDRA ZUKERMAN Assistant Editor, Edge As the meaning of George Church and Craig Venter's words permeated my ever-forming pre-frontal cortex at The Master Class, I cannot deny that I felt similarly to the way George Eliot described her own emotions in 1879. Eliot, speaking as Theophrastus in a little-known collection of essays published that year, predicts that evermore perfecting machines will imminently supercede the human race in "Shadows of the Coming Race:" When, in the Bank of England, I see a wondrously delicate machine for testing sovereigns, a shrewd implacable little steel Rhadamanthus that, once the coins are delivered up to it, lifts and balances each in turn for the fraction of an instant, finds it wanting or sufficient, and dismisses it to right or left with rigorous justice; when I am told of micrometers and thermopiles and tasimeters which deal physically with the invisible, the impalpable, and the unimaginable; of cunning wires and wheels and pointing needles which will register your and my quickness so as to exclude flattering opinion; of a machine for drawing the right conclusion, which will doubtless by-and-by be improved into an automaton for finding true premises -- my mind seeming too small for these things, I get a little out of it, like an unfortunate savage too suddenly brought face to face with civilisation, and I exclaim -- 'Am I already in the shadow of the Coming Race? and will the creatures who are to transcend and finally supersede us be steely organisms, giving out the effluvia of the laboratory, and performing with infallible exactness more than everything that we have performed with a slovenly approximativeness and self-defeating inaccuracy?' 1 ... EDGE MASTER CLASS PHOTO GALLERY [MORE...] ---------------------------------------------------- IN THE NEWS ---------------------------------------------------- THE NEW YORK TIMES Synthetic Life By John Markoff There is a growing consensus (at least in Silicon Valley) that the information age is about to give way to the era of synthetic genetics. That was underscored recently when Harvard geneticist George Church and J. Craig Venter -- of the race to decode the human genome fame -- gave lectures before a small group of scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs, and writers in West Hollywood. The event, billed as "A Short Course on Synthetic Genetics", was organized by John Brockman, the literary impresario (and book agent for several New York Times reporters, including this one) who publishes the cybersalon-style website www.edge.org, a forum dedicated to scientists (many of whom are his clients) and their ideas. In roughly six hours of lectures both scientists tried to convey how the world will be changed by the ability to routinely read genetic sequences into computing systems and then store, replicate, alter and insert them back into living cells. ... [MORE...] ---------------------------------------------------- THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS When Science & Poetry Were Friends By Freeman Dyson .....If the new Romantic Age is real, it will be centered on biology and computers, as the old one was centered on chemistry and poetry. Candidates for leadership of the modern Romantic Age are the biology wizards Kary Mullis, Dean Kamen, and Craig Venter, and the computer wizards Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Charles Simonyi. Craig Venter is the entrepreneur who taught the world how to read genomes fast; Kary Mullis is the surfer who taught the world how to multiply genomes fast; Dean Kamen is the medical engineer who taught the world how to make artificial hands that really work. Each achievement of our modern pioneers resonates with echoes from the past. Venter sailed around the world on his yacht collecting genomes of microbes from the ocean and sequencing them wholesale, like Banks who sailed around the world collecting plants. Mullis invented the polymerase chain reaction, which allows biologists to multiply a single molecule of DNA into a bucketful of identical molecules within a few hours, and after that spent most of his time surfing the beaches of California, like Davy who invented the miners' lamp and after that spent much of his time fly-fishing along the rivers of Scotland. Dean Kamen builds linkages between living human brains and mechanical fingers and thumbs, like Victor Frankenstein, who sewed dead brains and hands together and brought them to life. Page and Brin built the giant Google search engine that reaches out to the furthest limits of human knowledge, like William Herschel, who built his giant forty-foot telescope to reach out to the limits of the universe. Simonyi was chief architect of software systems for Microsoft and later flew twice as a cosmonaut on the International Space Station, like the intrepid aeronauts Blanchard and Jeffries, who made the first aerial voyage from England to France by balloon in 1795. ... [MORE...] ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- BOOKS FROM EDGE ---------------------------------------------------- The engrossing essay collection which offers a youthful spin on some of the most pressing scientific issues of today--and tomorrow...Kinda scary? Yes! Super smart and interesting? Definitely. THE OBSERVER'S Very Short List "A captivating collection of essays ... a medley of big ideas." Amanda Gefter, NEW SCIENTIST "The perfect collection for people who like to stay up on recent scientific research but haven't the time or expertise to go to the original sources." PLAYBACK.STL.COM WHAT'S NEXT? DISPATCHES ON THE FUTURE OF SCIENCE Edited By Max Brockman Vintage Books http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Next-Dispatches-Future-Science/dp/0307389316 If these authors are the future of science, then the science of the future will be one exciting ride! Find out what the best minds of the new generation are thinking before the Nobel Committee does. A fascinating chronicle of the big, new ideas that are keeping young scientists up at night. - Daniel Gilbert, author of STUMBLING ON HAPPINESS "A preview of the ideas you're going to be reading about in ten years." - Steven Pinker, author of THE STUFF OF THOUGHT "Brockman has a nose for talent." - Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author THE BLACK SWAN "Capaciously accessible, these writings project a curiosity to which followers of science news will gravitate." - BOOKLIST ---------------------------------------------------- WHAT HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND ABOUT Edited by John Brockman With An Introduction By BRIAN ENO Harper Perennial http://www.amazon.com/What-Have-Changed-Your-About/dp/0061686549 The world's finest minds have responded with some of the most insightful, humbling, fascinating confessions and anecdotes, an intellectual treasure trove. ... Best three or four hours of intense, enlightening reading you can do for the new year. Read it now." SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE "The splendidly enlightened Edge website (www.edge.org) has rounded off each year of inter-disciplinary debate by asking its heavy- hitting contributors to answer one question. I strongly recommend a visit." THE INDEPENDENT "A great event in the Anglo-Saxon culture." EL MUNDO "As fascinating and weighty as one would imagine." THE INDEPENDENT "They are the intellectual elite, the brains the rest of us rely on to make sense of the universe and answer the big questions. But in a refreshing show of new year humility, the world's best thinkers have admitted that from time to time even they are forced to change their minds." THE GUARDIAN "Even the world's best brains have to admit to being wrong sometimes: here, leading scientists respond to a new year challenge." THE TIMES "Provocative ideas put forward today by leading figures." THE TELEGRAPH The world's finest minds have responded with some of the most insightful, humbling, fascinating confessions and anecdotes, an intellectual treasure trove. ... Best three or four hours of intense, enlightening reading you can do for the new year. Read it now." SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE "As in the past, these world-class thinkers have responded to impossibly open-ended questions with erudition, imagination and clarity." THE NEWS & OBSERVER "A jolt of fresh thinking...The answers address a fabulous array of issues. This is the intellectual equivalent of a New Year's dip in the lake - bracing, possibly shriek-inducing, and bound to wake you up." THE GLOBE & MAIL "Answers ring like scientific odes to uncertainty, humility and doubt; passionate pleas for critical thought in a world threatened by blind convictions." THE TORONTO STAR "For an exceptionally high quotient of interesting ideas to words, this is hard to beat. ...What a feast of egg-head opinionating!" NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- This online EDGE edition with streaming video is available at: http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge296.html ---------------------------------------------------- Edge Foundation, Inc. is a nonprofit private operating foundation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- EDGE John Brockman, Editor and Publisher Russell Weinberger, Associate Publisher Alexandra Zukerman, Editorial Assistant Copyright (c) 2009 by EDGE Foundation, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Published by EDGE Foundation, Inc., 5 East 59th Street, New York, NY 10022 ---------------------------------------------------- EDGE Newsbytes: http://www.edge.org/newsbytes.html ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- --- You are currently subscribed to edge_editions as: uwskerr at gmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-4696961-19704407.fc82497f624f9ef7fb1fb764ef12a8cb at sand.lyris.net Or, you can use the web form at the following URL: http://www.edge.org/subscribe.html --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group. To post to this group, send email to diybio at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From spike66 at att.net Thu Aug 6 16:06:07 2009 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:06:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: ... > >> > >> But think about this: the sea level is already rising, today, at a > >> rate of about 300 mm/year. ... sea level is rising anyway. > >> > >> Alfio > > > > > > Did you mean micrometers per year? ?Or millimeters per millenium? > > Millimeters per century? > > > > spike > > > Millimeters per century. Sorry. > > Alfio Ja, my fault, I coulda actually looked it up before I asked. {8^D A millihour after I sent it, the thought hit me, doh! Alfio, I have a hard time getting excited over 300 mm/century. We can move cities faster than that, especially given the increased economic opportunites afforded by the planet recovering to more temperate climates. spike From jonkc at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 6 17:06:47 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John K Clark) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 13:06:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen onclimatehysteria. References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2F3DFE0B16054F5B98EF4F1012ED5E02@MyComputer> "Alfio Puglisi" > All current evidence points to warming in a medium timescale (100s of > years) 100's of years! To hell with my great great grandchildren, let them fend for themselves; after all, my great great grandfather didn't worry a lot about me. It's a little like the Wright Brothers not having the time to develop their airplane because they were too busy worrying about how people a century from their time will solve the air traffic control problem. > so that's what we are preparing to face. It's that simple. You're right that is the important question to ask: what are we prepared to face? As I said before if you want to lower CO2 you're going to have to get rid of fossil fuels, and all the replacements so far suggested are FAR more expensive; the only one that even comes close is nuclear fission but environmentalists will go into a tizzy fit if you even mention that. More expensive energy doesn't mean fat cats make less money, it means billions of poor people will control less energy than they do now. A lot less. And that means billions of people will become even poorer than they are now. A lot poorer. And that means people are going to die. Millions and millions of people. If the Iraq war has taught us anything it's that trading a hypothetical future problem that might not even be real for a present horror that most certainly is real is not a very good idea. You want to start a preemptive war on the poor. I don't. John K Clark From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 17:17:46 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:17:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] [Open Manufacturing] Fwd: Edge 296: George Church-Craig Venter Master Class on Synthetic Genomics; Edge Summer Reading In-Reply-To: <4A7B0F92.6010404@anarchism.is> References: <55ad6af70908060906h38f58391v999a087bfa17402d@mail.gmail.com> <4A7B0F92.6010404@anarchism.is> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908061017w47b70cc0p3b9690491265a844@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/6 Sm?ri McCarthy : > I've watched the first two hours. The people there are big names like > Larry Page, Tim O'Reilly, George Dyson and John Dvorak... and it gets > really fun about half way into the second video when they get really > deep into existential risks. I'm glad they're on our side. You'd think they were on "our side" but as it turns out the majority of them- such as O'Reilly, Venter, Church, Endy, etc.- have been making these "super secret" startups or something. Okay, they aren't too secret, and it's not bad to make a startup, but for all of the open source vouching that Church, Venter and Endy do, why are they making all of these proprietary technologies? I am not convinced. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 18:00:40 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 20:00:40 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:06 PM, spike wrote: > > Alfio, I have a hard time getting excited over 300 mm/century. ?We can move > cities faster than that, That's. It has accelerated from a third of that 100 years ago, and almost nothing before. All models predict that the rate will stay at least constant, or that it will accelerate further. I share your view that the current rate is not so bad. Apart from a few unfortunate islands, damage can be contained. If the pessimist projections come true it's another story. > especially given the increased economic opportunites afforded by the planet recovering to more temperate climates. I find more realistic that, even if the planet was moving towards a better climate, the transition period would see some difficulties. Maybe after another steady state is reached. Alfio From max at maxmore.com Thu Aug 6 17:36:18 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:36:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Drexler on Asia and the elements of innovation Message-ID: <200908061803.n76I35Mr006054@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Nice to see a new piece by Eric: Asia and the elements of innovation By Eric Drexler http://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/innovation/asia-and-the-elements-of-innovation ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 18:33:35 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 20:33:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen onclimatehysteria. In-Reply-To: <2F3DFE0B16054F5B98EF4F1012ED5E02@MyComputer> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> <2F3DFE0B16054F5B98EF4F1012ED5E02@MyComputer> Message-ID: <4902d9990908061133y337fa677m3c67f06b8af44b66@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:06 PM, John K Clark wrote: > "Alfio Puglisi" > >> All current evidence points to warming in a medium timescale (100s of >> years) > > 100's of years! To hell with my great great grandchildren, let them fend for > themselves; That's a moral issue and I don't have graphs for that. :-) We'll just have to disagree. > More expensive energy doesn't mean fat cats make less money, it means > billions of poor people will control less energy than they do now. A lot > less. ?And that means billions of people will become even poorer than they > are now. A lot poorer. And that means people are going to die. Millions and > millions of people. > > If the Iraq war has taught us anything it's that trading a hypothetical > future problem that might not even be real for a present horror that most > certainly is real is not a very good idea. You want to start a preemptive > war on the poor. I don't. It seems that you have ignored the distinction I made a few posts ago: pointing out that global warming exists, and why, is one thing. What to do, and if something must be done at all, is another. Up to now most of the discussion has been on whether global warming exists, and what could happen in the near future. I fail to see how describing current trends, and likely future ones, amounts to starting a preemptive war. It's rather an observation, like describing the orbit of an asteroid. It's true that these observations will be the base for world-reaching policies, but even if the asteroid is going to hit the planet, you don't accuse the astronomer who pointed out the trajectory. On the policy part, my ideas are much more confused and I don't think I can make many good points. So I'll let your remarks unanswered. But at least I'm clear on one thing: to make sensible policy decision, good information is required. If you start saying that merely pointing out the possible warming amounts to a war, you'll be tempted to dismiss facts on the ground of ideology. That's never a good idea. Alfio From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Aug 6 18:11:20 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:11:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] META: Re: Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <11E643959E954931A25A4943AE0C4AC8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908041325g3073cdd4me3f04afb4e281fee@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050143t5da761ddh9efc35eefabe8e6f@mail.gmail.com> <03459659598A475CAEBCFB75FBE03079@MyComputer> <4902d9990908050831g7b64677aq676d4ffbc2a202be@mail.gmail.com> <2E14BE85F2D04F45B4465D8EA8C3B2D8@MyComputer> <4902d9990908051123h74322e64t348ebb0499d1cb79@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090806141120.13ot6zfixsgwogw8@webmail.natasha.cc> Do list members think this thread has run its course? Natasha From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 18:38:23 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 20:38:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:06 PM, spike wrote: > >> >> Alfio, I have a hard time getting excited over 300 mm/century. ?We can move >> cities faster than that, > > That's. It has accelerated from a third of that 100 years ago, and I don't know what happened with that sentence at the start :-) It was: "That's the current rate. it has accelerated...." > almost nothing before. All models predict that the rate will stay at > least constant, or that it will accelerate further. > > I share your view that the current rate is not so bad. Apart from a > few unfortunate islands, damage can be contained. If the pessimist > projections come true it's another story. > >> especially given the increased economic opportunites afforded by the planet recovering to more temperate climates. > > I find more realistic that, even if the planet was moving towards a > better climate, the transition period would see some difficulties. > Maybe after another steady state is reached. > > Alfio > From protokol2020 at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 18:52:02 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 20:52:02 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: What superriver fils the Ocean, Alfio? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 6 19:07:16 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 20:07:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 8/6/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > What superriver fils the Ocean, Alfio? > Quote: Global sea level is currently rising as a result of both ocean thermal expansion and glacier melt, with each accounting for about half of the observed sea level rise, and each caused by recent increases in global mean temperature. For the period 1961-2003, the observed sea level rise due to thermal expansion was 0.42 millimeters per year and 0.69 millimeters per year due to total glacier melt (small glaciers, ice caps, ice sheets) (IPCC 2007). Between 1993 and 2003, the contribution to sea level rise increased for both sources to 1.60 millimeters per year and 1.19 millimeters per year respectively (IPCC 2007). Antarctica and Greenland, the world's largest ice sheets, make up the vast majority of the Earth's ice. If these ice sheets melted entirely, sea level would rise by more than 70 meters. However, current estimates indicate that mass balance for the Antarctic ice sheet is in approximate equilibrium and may represent only about 10 percent of the current contribution to sea level rise coming from glaciers. However, some localized areas of the Antarctic have recently shown significant negative balance, e.g., Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers, and glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula. There is still much uncertainty about accumulation rates in Antarctica, especially on the East Antarctic Plateau. The Greenland Ice Sheet may be contributing about 30 percent of all glacier melt to rising sea level. Furthermore, recent observations show evidence for increased ice flow rates in some regions of the Greenland Ice Sheet, suggesting that ice dynamics may be a key factor in the response of coastal glaciers and ice sheets to climate change and their role in sea level rise. In contrast to the polar regions, the network of lower latitude small glaciers and ice caps, although making up only about four percent of the total land ice area or about 760,000 square kilometers, may have provided as much as 60 percent of the total glacier contribution to sea level change since 1990s (Meier et al., 2007). -------------------- BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Aug 6 19:50:00 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:50:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> At 08:07 PM 8/6/2009 +0100, BillK wrote: >On 8/6/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > > What superriver fils the Ocean, Alfio? > >Quote: > >Global sea level is currently rising as a result of both ocean thermal >expansion and glacier melt, with each accounting for about half of the >observed sea level rise, and each caused by recent increases in global >mean temperature. Bill, you're feeding the troll. This nitwit could have looked that up in a second if he'd wanted to. Damien Broderick E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.445) Database version: 6.12970 http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/ From hkhenson at rogers.com Fri Aug 7 01:02:25 2009 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (hkhenson) Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 18:02:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] simplifying? Message-ID: <1249607504_16452@s6.cableone.net> I have had an awful time with this complex idea. People complain that you have to be a rocket scientist to read it. If anyone has ideas on how to simplify the explanation while still keeping it accurate, please let me know, either here or by private email. Thanks, Keith **************** Recently there has been talk about abandoning NASA's $300 billion project of going back to the moon. If the goal is a continued and growing human presence in space, going back to the moon for flags and footprints won't do it any more than it did it last time. There are reasons (besides F&F) for a massive human presence in space. All of the major problems, global warming (or at least CO2 buildup), energy (including liquid transport fuels) water, food and poverty can all be helped if not completely solved with vast amounts of inexpensive space based solar power (SBSP). How vast is vast? In round numbers humans need 25 TW of new SBSP over the next 25 years starting as soon as possible. And we would need another 15 TW for two decades to put 100 ppm of CO2 back in the ground as synthetic oil (Current world wide primary energy consumption is around 15 TW.) And how inexpensive? Two cents per kWh will under price electricity from coal or nuclear by half. One cent per kWh will displace oil with cleaner, carbon neutral synthetics for about a dollar a gallon. To meet these goals, the power satellites can't cost more than $800 million to $1.6 B per GW ($800-1600/kW). Toward the end of 25 years of construction, the flow of materials to GEO for power satellite construction (at two TW/year) will exceed 1000 tons per hour (at 5kg/kW). It seems likely that most of that will be from extraterrestrial sources. An initial flow of parts from earth of 100 t/hr and a cost of $100/kg or less is a near term design target (build up to this rate in less than ten years). This side of nanotechnology it's probably impossible to do with chemical rockets. To appreciate why you need to appreciate the rocket equation and "mass ratio." For business people it is like compound interest at a high interest rate--ruinous if you need multiples of the exhaust velocity. A mass ratio 3 vehicle (100 tons of structure and payload, 200 tons of fuel) will reach its exhaust velocity. To get to LEO is about 2.5 times chemical rocket exhaust velocity and takes a mass ratio of 12. For an empty mass of 100 tones, the liftoff mass is 1200 tons. A hundred tons of rocket might be able to hold 1100 tons of fuel, but no payload. This is why rockets are staged. Laser propulsion is one way to get around the low exhaust velocity problem. We have understood laser propulsion for a long time. It is not efficient at low velocity and requires huge lasers for small payloads. The combination of a mass ratio 3 chemical first stage (providing 4 km/sec) and a mass ratio 2 ablation laser upper stage (providing 10km/sec from an 15km/sec exhaust velocity) looks like it will get the transport cost to GEO into the sub $100/kg range. For the same laser, this method provides payloads of 4-6 times that of laser propulsion from the ground. Dr. Peter Schubert has done parametric analysis to minimize cost. Below about $450/kg, direct from earth construction of power sats cost less. Above that number, supplying materials from the moon is less expensive. Even if we start by hauling the power satellite parts up from earth, in a few years it will makes sense to construct them partly from lunar or asteroid materials?especially if a lot of the mass of a power satellite is Invar (35% nickel) or lunar dust used for heat transfer. In the next decade, it looks like reducing the cost to GEO using a chemical/laser two stage or some other method will get space industry started. (Probably not by the US/NASA though.) Space habitats happen naturally in the context of large SBSP production. A crew of 1000 at GEO building and unjamming automation cost almost nothing in the context of profits of $500 million a day. With a materials pipeline of 100 t/hr, supplies are insignificant. Mining camps at asteroids and/or on the moon make sense with an established market. I went into more detail recently. Google Henson oil drum. A first pass proforma statement indicated a peak investment of a bit under $60 B. Keith Henson From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 05:19:31 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 07:19:31 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: Thermal expansion? What are you talking about? The majority of sea water is a little above 0 degrees C. The water is the most dense at about 4 degrees C. So, a warming of say 1 or 2 degrees would shrink this water body! Can you comprehend it? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 05:22:19 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 07:22:19 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thermal expansion? What are you talking about? The majority of sea water is a little above 0 degrees C. The water is the most dense at about 4 degrees C. So, a warming of say 1 or 2 degrees would shrink this water body! Can you comprehend it? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From painlord2k at libero.it Fri Aug 7 08:05:23 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 10:05:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> BillK ha scritto: > On 8/6/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: >> What superriver fils the Ocean, Alfio? >> > Quote: > Global sea level is currently rising as a result of both ocean thermal > expansion and glacier melt, with each accounting for about half of the > observed sea level rise, and each caused by recent increases in global > mean temperature. For the period 1961-2003, the observed sea level > rise due to thermal expansion was 0.42 millimeters per year and 0.69 > millimeters per year due to total glacier melt (small glaciers, ice > caps, ice sheets) (IPCC 2007). Between 1993 and 2003, the contribution > to sea level rise increased for both sources to 1.60 millimeters per > year and 1.19 millimeters per year respectively (IPCC 2007). How much trust able is the IPCC 2007 data? What researches they cite for these data? Are they available? The raw data of these researches is available? There are other researches that confirm or deny these data? > However, current > estimates indicate that mass balance for the Antarctic ice sheet is in > approximate equilibrium and may represent only about 10 percent of the > current contribution to sea level rise coming from glaciers. So, it is around 0.16 mm per year for Antarctica only. 90% the rest of the glaciers are > However, > some localized areas of the Antarctic have recently shown significant > negative balance, e.g., Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers, and > glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula. The localized areas are of not interest in the global balance of water. In fact, appear that "Antarctic Sea Ice Up 4.7% Since 1980" http://www.iceagenow.com/Antarctic_Sea_Ice_Up_Over_4.7%25_Since_1980.htm > There is still much uncertainty > about accumulation rates in Antarctica, especially on the East > Antarctic Plateau. > The Greenland Ice Sheet may be contributing about > 30 percent of all glacier melt to rising sea level. Furthermore, > recent observations show evidence for increased ice flow rates in some > regions of the Greenland Ice Sheet, suggesting that ice dynamics may > be a key factor in the response of coastal glaciers and ice sheets to > climate change and their role in sea level rise. Recent observations? New Study Finds Greenland Ice Melt 'not changing' or 'dropping' http://www.iceagenow.com/New_Study_Finds_Greenland_Ice_Melt_not_changing_or_dropping.htm > In contrast to the polar regions, the network of lower latitude small > glaciers and ice caps, although making up only about four percent of > the total land ice area or about 760,000 square kilometers, may have > provided as much as 60 percent of the total glacier contribution to > sea level change since 1990s (Meier et al., 2007). Glaciers in Norway Growing Again http://www.iceagenow.com/Glaciers_in_Norway_Growing_Again.htm Alaska?s ice thickens over unusual summer http://www.iceagenow.com/Alaska_ice_thickens_over_unusual_summer.htm California Glaciers Growing ? http://www.iceagenow.com/California_Glaciers_Growing.htm Mirco From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 08:36:51 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:36:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> Message-ID: On 8/7/09, Mirco Romanato wrote: > Glaciers in Norway Growing Again > http://www.iceagenow.com/Glaciers_in_Norway_Growing_Again.htm > > Alaska?s ice thickens over unusual summer > http://www.iceagenow.com/Alaska_ice_thickens_over_unusual_summer.htm > > California Glaciers Growing ? > http://www.iceagenow.com/California_Glaciers_Growing.htm > iceagenow is a junk science web site created by one man to promote his self-published book. Quote: It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must climb over a mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then disintegrates in the palm of your hand. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world's most eminent scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals. You must, if you are David Bellamy, embrace instead the claims of an eccentric former architect, which are based on what appears to be a non-existent data set. And you must do all this while calling yourself a scientist. ------------ BillK From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 09:34:28 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:34:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> Message-ID: <4902d9990908070234p2ac0c7bx405340928968a342@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Mirco Romanato wrote: > BillK ha scritto: >> On 8/6/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: >>> What superriver fils the Ocean, Alfio? >>> > >> Quote: > >> Global sea level is currently rising as a result of both ocean thermal >> expansion and glacier melt, with each accounting for about half of the >> observed sea level rise, and each caused by recent increases in global >> mean temperature. For the period 1961-2003, the observed sea level >> rise due to thermal expansion was 0.42 millimeters per year and 0.69 >> millimeters per year due to total glacier melt (small glaciers, ice >> caps, ice sheets) (IPCC 2007). Between 1993 and 2003, the contribution >> to sea level rise increased for both sources to 1.60 millimeters per >> year and 1.19 millimeters per year respectively (IPCC 2007). > > How much trust able is the IPCC 2007 data? > What researches they cite for these data? Are they available? The raw > data of these researches is available? There are other researches that > confirm or deny these data? Go to http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.htm and have a look at the three working group reports of the IPCC for the 2007 assessment. Each chapter is heavily referenced. Alfio From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 09:40:25 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:40:25 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908070234p2ac0c7bx405340928968a342@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> <4902d9990908070234p2ac0c7bx405340928968a342@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Doesn't matter how referenced, if all references are bull. "Thermal expanding of sea" is just another. Told you why. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From painlord2k at libero.it Fri Aug 7 09:48:17 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:48:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> Message-ID: <4A7BF861.4000306@libero.it> BillK ha scritto: > On 8/7/09, Mirco Romanato wrote: >> Glaciers in Norway Growing Again >> http://www.iceagenow.com/Glaciers_in_Norway_Growing_Again.htm >> >> Alaska?s ice thickens over unusual summer >> http://www.iceagenow.com/Alaska_ice_thickens_over_unusual_summer.htm >> >> >> California Glaciers Growing ? >> http://www.iceagenow.com/California_Glaciers_Growing.htm > iceagenow is a junk science web site created by one man to promote > his self-published book. > > Quote: It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to > dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must climb over a > mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then > disintegrates in the palm of your hand. You must ignore an entire > canon of science, the statements of the world's most eminent > scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the > foremost scientific journals. You must, if you are David Bellamy, > embrace instead the claims of an eccentric former architect, which > are based on what appears to be a non-existent data set. And you must > do all this while calling yourself a scientist. Well, I don't support this particular person on his particular theories. I was looking for facts and hard data. You don't wrote anywhere that these facts are false or incorrectly interpreted. Your was only an ad ominem attack. http://www.dailytech.com/Glaciers+in+Norway+Growing+Again/article13540.htm Glaciers in Norway Growing Again http://www.dailytech.com/Alaskan+Glaciers+Grow+for+First+Time+in+250+years/article13215.htm Alaskan Glaciers Grow for First Time in 250 years http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2008-07-08-mt-shasta-growing-glaciers_N.htm Glaciers on California's Mt. Shasta keep growing > The Sierra's 498 ice formations ? glaciers and ice fields ? have > shrunk by about half their size over the past 100 years, with those > exposed to direct sunlight shrinking fastest, said Andrew Fountain, a > geology professor at Portland State University who has inventoried > the glaciers in the continental U.S. as part of a federal initiative. How is I continue to find quotes about how the glaciers shrinked for 100 or 250 years. What was the cause of these shrinks? Mirco From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 11:09:57 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 13:09:57 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4A7BF861.4000306@libero.it> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> <4A7BF861.4000306@libero.it> Message-ID: <4902d9990908070409x7bad3561qaacb2266091429e2@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Mirco Romanato wrote: > > Well, I don't support this particular person on his particular theories. > I was looking for facts and hard data. > You don't wrote anywhere that these facts are false or incorrectly > interpreted. Your was only an ad ominem attack. If you are looking for "facts and hard data", you don't go to random websites or newspapers articles like usatoday. You'll just collect noise. Rather, for an overview, use established institution sites, like the World Glacier Monitoring Service: http://www.wgms.ch/ If you want the last research, Google Scholar will give you recently published articles: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=glacier+mass+balance&hl=en&btnG=Search Alfio From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 11:39:03 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 12:39:03 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise (was: Curves on a graph (was Re:RichardLindzen on climatehysteria)) In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908070409x7bad3561qaacb2266091429e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> <4A7BF861.4000306@libero.it> <4902d9990908070409x7bad3561qaacb2266091429e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 8/7/09, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > If you are looking for "facts and hard data", you don't go to random > websites or newspapers articles like usatoday. You'll just collect > noise. > > Rather, for an overview, use established institution sites, like the > World Glacier Monitoring Service: http://www.wgms.ch/ > But what do you do if the voices in your head tell you that all the established science sites are part of a vast socialist conspiracy to bankrupt the country? Oh, sorry. I forgot for a minute that the country has already been bankrupted by the thieves in power. Well, in that case it must be a vast socialist conspiracy to make the situation even worse (if that's possible). ;) BillK From scerir at libero.it Fri Aug 7 13:13:29 2009 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 15:13:29 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908050849p6528b5b9q6e595842912fc2b7@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com><4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com><4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> <4902d9990908070234p2ac0c7bx405340928968a342@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000301ca1760$dc4996f0$df0a4797@archimede> Alfio: > Go to http://www.ipcc.ch/ > and have a look at the three working group reports > of the IPCC for the 2007 assessment. > Each chapter is heavily referenced. See also: "Scientific reticence and sea level rise." -J. E. Hansen (NASA Giss) (Submitted on 23 Mar 2007) Abstract: I suggest that a "scientific reticence" is inhibiting communication of a threat of potentially large sea level rise. Delay is dangerous because of system inertias that could create a situation with future sea level changes out of our control. I argue for calling together a panel of scientific leaders to hear evidence and issue a prompt plain-written report on current understanding of the sea level change issue. http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0703/0703220.pdf It seems (to me) relevant what Hansen writes: "The nonlinearity of the ice sheet problem makes it impossible to accurately predict sea level change on a specific date. However, as a physicist, I find it almost inconceivable that BAU [business-as-usual] climate change would not yield a sea level change measured in meters on the century time scale." From stathisp at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 13:34:16 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 23:34:16 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: 2009/8/7 Tomaz Kristan : > Thermal expansion? > > What are you talking about? The majority of sea water is a little above 0 > degrees C. The water is the most dense at about 4 degrees C. So, a warming > of say 1 or 2 degrees would shrink this water body! > > Can you comprehend it? Fresh water is densest at 4 degrees C, but salt water is densest at the freezing point, so that warming causes expansion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(properties)#Density_of_saltwater_and_ice -- Stathis Papaioannou From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 14:09:51 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:09:51 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: > salt water is densest at the freezing point, so that warming causes expansion Freezing point for salt water is above 0. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 14:27:21 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 00:27:21 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: 2009/8/8 Tomaz Kristan : >> salt water is densest at the freezing point, so that warming causes >> expansion > > Freezing point for salt water is above 0. No, the freezing point for salt water is below 0, around -2 degrees C for seawater. Seawater is densest near this temperature and expands as it warms up. -- Stathis Papaioannou From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 16:53:15 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 18:53:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <20090806195002769.KNGI18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> Message-ID: Oh, yes. My bad now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Fri Aug 7 19:19:17 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 19:19:17 +0000 Subject: [ExI] The Medical Algorithms Project Message-ID: <20090807191917.9P65O.76227.root@hrndva-web26-z01> http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0932 The Medical Algorithms Project, a web-based resource located at www.medal.org, is the world's largest collection of medical-related spreadsheets, consisting of over 13,500 Excel spreadsheets each encoding a medical algorithm from 45 different areas of medical practice. This free resource is in use worldwide with over 106,000 registered users as of March 1, 2009. -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 20:50:06 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:50:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > > CO2 sensitivity is estimated looking at past climate trends, > especially from ice core data, and how the variation of the CO2 level > influenced the temperature (taking into account external forcings like > solar irradiation, etc). The numbers come out at around 3?C / > doubling, but there's a disturbing tail of low-probability results of > 6?C/doubling or more, that does not want to go away. > ### You are familiar with the finding that for the most part CO2 concentration *trails* changes in historical temperatures? In other words, CO2 is primarily forced by temperature, with only a secondary feedback effect (presumably) acting the other way. This essentially precludes the use of ice core data for the purpose of estimating climate sensitivity to CO2. ----------------------------------------- > If a new record year is what you want, just wait a few more years. ### Yeah, let's wait. ----------------- > > Given that most nations didn't even follow the Kyoto protocol, I find > it difficult to understand how one could measure its cost. Can you > give me a link for that number? How was it estimated? http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.html ---------------------------- Also adaptation cost goes up with > time. ### Really? Why? --------------------- What is the scenario for that estimate? and what year? ### IPCC predictions around 2007. ------------------------ > "precise" is a term that can be qualified. If you mean "precise to > 0.1?C in 2100" then no, we can't to that. If you mean "precise" as > discriminating between cooling, stationary and warming of at least a > few ?C then yes, we can do that. ### These "few degC" is all that counts, since 1 C is nothing but 10C could be troublesome. You need to be able to predict to an accuracy of 1C or better, verified by observation, not curve fitting to historical data, to justify spending trillions of dollars. ----------------------- > Since you seem convinced that we cannot reliably predict warming for > the next century, and since current CO2 levels are known to have a > forcing of a few watts/m^2, it follows that you somehow assume that > this forcing will have no measurable effect. > ### You do not know climate sensitivity to CO2, and I assume nothing. All I say is there is insufficient data to predict future climate at this time. ----------------------------- > > IPCC reports are a summary of current scientific research. If you > don't believe it, there's nothing I can do, except encouraging you to > read it and cross-check its statements with current scientific > research. ### IPCC reports are an excerpt of data designed to support a particular predetermined conclusion, namely the need to expand government control of our lives. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 20:52:19 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:52:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: <000301ca1760$dc4996f0$df0a4797@archimede> References: <4902d9990908050812u5f114009lebed1e2765e65a87@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060147n2f1f033ah5defe8f861b02f59@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061100he1a80a3p77a0c450493133f4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908061138y38a00b1co51a2a2ff489d1578@mail.gmail.com> <4A7BE043.5050106@libero.it> <4902d9990908070234p2ac0c7bx405340928968a342@mail.gmail.com> <000301ca1760$dc4996f0$df0a4797@archimede> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> Hansen has been found guilty of significant scientific misconduct. One should be very careful of using him as a source. Rafal On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:13 AM, scerir wrote: > Alfio: >> Go to http://www.ipcc.ch/ >> and have a look at the three working group reports >> of the IPCC for the 2007 assessment. >> Each chapter is heavily referenced. > > See also: > > "Scientific reticence and sea level rise." > -J. E. Hansen (NASA Giss) > (Submitted on 23 Mar 2007) > Abstract: I suggest that a "scientific reticence" is inhibiting > communication of a threat of potentially large sea level rise. Delay is > dangerous because of system inertias that could create a situation with > future sea level changes out of our control. I argue for calling together a > panel of scientific leaders to hear evidence and issue a prompt > plain-written report on current understanding of the sea level change issue. > http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0703/0703220.pdf > > > It seems (to me) relevant what Hansen writes: > "The nonlinearity of the ice sheet problem makes > it impossible to accurately predict sea level > change on a specific date. However, as a physicist, > I find it almost inconceivable that BAU [business-as-usual] > climate change would not yield a sea level change measured > in meters on the century time scale." From jameschoate at austin.rr.com Fri Aug 7 21:03:05 2009 From: jameschoate at austin.rr.com (jameschoate at austin.rr.com) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:03:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> ---- Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Hansen has been found guilty of significant scientific misconduct. One > should be very careful of using him as a source. That probably holds for any source of data or statement of position... http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prevalence+of+scientific+misconduct&aq=f&oq=&aqi= -- -- -- -- -- Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus James Choate jameschoate at austin.rr.com james.choate at twcable.com 512-657-1279 www.ssz.com http://www.twine.com/twine/1128gqhxn-dwr/solar-soyuz-zaibatsu http://www.twine.com/twine/1178v3j0v-76w/confusion-research-center Adapt, Adopt, Improvise -- -- -- -- From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 22:00:37 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 00:00:37 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021417s61eba421r62cd076513c1bf8d@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > >> >> CO2 sensitivity is estimated looking at past climate trends, >> especially from ice core data, and how the variation of the CO2 level >> influenced the temperature (taking into account external forcings like >> solar irradiation, etc). The numbers come out at around 3?C / >> doubling, but there's a disturbing tail of low-probability results of >> 6?C/doubling or more, that does not want to go away. >> > ### You are familiar with the finding that for the most part CO2 > concentration *trails* changes in historical temperatures? In other > words, CO2 is primarily forced by temperature, with only a secondary > feedback effect (presumably) acting the other way. I'm familiar with that finding, and it's precisely the finding that got a lot of people worried. We know that CO2 raises temperature. The ice cores show that, when temperature raise because of Earth's orbital changes, after a while CO2 goes up too. So you have two effects which increase each other, a classic case of positive feedback. > This essentially > precludes the use of ice core data for the purpose of estimating > climate sensitivity to CO2. On the contrary, it's precisely the raise of CO2 that allows the estimation: we know how many W/m^2 the orbital forcing does, and other feedbacks like ice sheets, etc. and thus how much the temperature should change to bring back the Earth into equilibrium. Turns out this insufficient to explain the ice age / interglacial cycle. The additional warming comes from CO2, and can be quantified. That's how the 3?C/doubling has been estimated. >> Given that most nations didn't even follow the Kyoto protocol, I find >> it difficult to understand how one could measure its cost. Can you >> give me a link for that number? How was it estimated? > > http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.html That's not estimating anything, just running a counter with numbers. Since Kyoto has not been implemented by most countries that signed it, I still think the cost has been near zero. > ---------------------------- > > ?Also adaptation cost goes up with >> time. > > ### Really? Why? Because, assuming CO2 emissions go on, the warming goes on too. > ------------------------ >> "precise" is a term that can be qualified. If you mean "precise to >> 0.1?C in 2100" then no, we can't to that. If you mean "precise" as >> discriminating between cooling, stationary and warming of at least a >> few ?C then yes, we can do that. > > ### These "few degC" is all that counts, since 1 C is nothing but 10C > could be troublesome. You need to be able to predict to an accuracy of > 1C or better, verified by observation, not curve fitting to historical > data, to justify spending trillions of dollars. 10C is two times the difference between today and an ice age. "could be troublesome" is a mighty underestimate. Serious effect in the short term begin at 2-3?C, and less than that in the long term. I think that, rather than getting a prediction down the last degree, you have to show that bad outcomes have significant probability of occurring. Or do you play Russian roulette often? > ----------------------- >> IPCC reports are a summary of current scientific research. If you >> don't believe it, there's nothing I can do, except encouraging you to >> read it and cross-check its statements with current scientific >> research. > > ### IPCC reports are an excerpt of data designed to support a > particular predetermined conclusion, namely the need to expand > government control of our lives. I know that this list has libertarian views but, come on. Renewable energy is a dynamic market environment with lots of startups and now some bigger firms. Solar allows distributed energy generation by individuals. While the technologies that should be phased out are mostly under government control! Leaving apart your conspiracy theories, if you think the IPCC gives a partial view of current scientific opinion, try to find some significant number of climate scientists with different views. Alfio From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 22:45:35 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:45:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Debian rides the space shuttle (1997) Message-ID: <55ad6af70908071545y722cfa61yfe9ea281d8a27b13@mail.gmail.com> I was browsing through some papers on my server and found this short article and figure it should be posted. http://heybryan.org/books/papers/Debian%20rides%20the%20space%20shuttle.html """ ************************************************************************ Here is a press release on Debian's flying on the space shuttle. If you are friends with a member of the press, please pass this on to them with a request for them to write about it. We'll be promoting this to the major computer magazines, etc. Thanks Bruce Perens NEW COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEM RIDES SPACE SHUTTLE Contact: Bruce Perens 510-215-3502 A radically different new computer operating system is controlling an experiment on a Space Shuttle mission in late March. The experiment tests "hydroponics", a way of growing plants without soil that could eventually provide oxygen and food to astronauts. The computer controlling the experiment runs "Debian GNU/Linux", an operating system built by a group of 200 volunteer computer programmers who tele-collaborated over the Internet and never met each other. The system has many earthly uses - it can replace conventional operating systems such as Microsoft's "Windows 95" on personal computers. In a departure from conventional operating system practice, the volunteer group is giving the system and all of its source code away for free. Details are available on the group's web site: http:/www.debian.org/ . "Linux is the modern successor to the Unix operating system developed by Bell Labs during the 1970's", said Bruce Perens, leader of the Debian project. "A Finnish college student started Linux in the early 1990's, and was joined by others on the Internet who helped develop the system. We united Linux with free software contributed by other volunteers to make a complete system of 800 software packages. The result communicates on the Internet and includes, for free, many normally-expensive programs such as web servers, computer languages like Java, C, and C++, and many other programs". The space shuttle experiment will fly on mission STS-83 in late March and early April. Sebastian Kuzminsky is an engineer working on the computer that controls the experiment, which is operated by Biosciences Corporation. Kuzminsky said "The experiment studies the growth of plants in microgravity. It uses a miniature '486 PC-compatible computer, the Ampro CoreModule 4DXi. Debian GNU/Linux is loaded on this system in place of DOS or Windows. The fragility and power drain of disk drives ruled them out for this experiment, and a solid-state disk replacement from the SanDisk company is used in their place. The entire system uses only 10 watts", said Kuzminsky, as much electricity as a night-light. "The computer controls an experiment in hydroponics, or the growth of plants without soil", said Kuzminsky. "It controls water and light for the growing plants, and sends telemetry and video of the plants to the ground". Educators have also gravitated to the "Debian GNU/Linux" system. David Teague, a computer prof at Western Carolina University, says "most of the laboratories in our CS department run Debian. We use it to teach programming, operating systems, system administration, and web page design". Schools from the primary grades to college use the system to provide inexpensive Internet access to their students. "Most of us are computer professionals, but we produced Debian GNU/Linux as a hobby project", said Perens, who works as a graphics programmer for the company that made "Toy Story". "It started out three years ago as a loose collaboration of 60 people who had communicated on the Internet but had never met each other. We were dissatisfied with the operating systems available to us, which had not kept pace with the development of our computer hardware. We felt that the 'net had become so big that we could bring a group of volunteer programmers together on it to produce things that had only been made by huge companies up to now. We hoped that lots of people would put the system we created to serious use, but we couldn't advertise it except by making a web page and talking about it on the Internet. It didn't take long for us to pick up thousands of users, and for the volunteer staff to swell to 200 programmers from all over the world. People were taking Microsoft off of their systems to install Debian". Today the system has spawned its own non-profit organization, "Software in the Public Interest", to support further development. The members come from every continent in the world. "We're still interested in picking up more volunteers", said Perens, "and we always welcome new users". People interested in the system can learn about "Debian GNU/Linux" on the group's web site "www.debian.org". The web site provides free downloads of the entire system, and instructions on installing it. """ - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 06:00:03 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 08:00:03 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: How many salt you have to put into water (in %) to its densest temperature point falls to -2 degrees C? I presume very little is not enough, to instantly jump for 6 degrees. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 10:04:09 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:04:09 +1000 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: 2009/8/8 Alfio Puglisi : > I know that this list has libertarian views Some members of the list have libertarian views. -- Stathis Papaioannou From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 10:38:25 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:38:25 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: 2009/8/8 Tomaz Kristan : > How many salt you have to put into water (in %) to its densest temperature > point falls to -2 degrees C? > > I presume very little is not enough, to instantly jump for 6 degrees. This page allows you to calculate water density at a particular temperature and salinity: http://www.csgnetwork.com/h2odenscalc.html -- Stathis Papaioannou From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 13:38:23 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:38:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908080638w4d9e1bcdgb5da007466fd1eb8@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > 2009/8/8 Alfio Puglisi : > >> I know that this list has libertarian views > > Some members of the list have libertarian views. Thanks for the correction. Generalizations are always dangerous. To lighten the mood a bit, here's a gem I found today: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/divine-assistance-meets-global-warming/article1244159/ Quote: "Villagers from deeply Roman Catholic south Switzerland have for centuries offered a sacred vow to God to protect them from the advancing ice mass of the Great Aletsch Glacier. Global warming is making them want to reverse their prayers, and the Alpine faithful are seeking the permission of the Pope. Since the vow was established in 1678, the deal was simple: the citizens of the isolated mountain hamlets of Fiesch and Fieschertal would pledge to lead virtuous lives. In exchange, God would spare their homes and livelihoods from being swallowed by Europe's largest glacier as it expanded toward the valley with heavy winter snows. Times have changed.... " Alfio From painlord2k at libero.it Sat Aug 8 14:49:51 2009 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 16:49:51 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies Message-ID: <4A7D908F.60709@libero.it> Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/treder20090807/ It was also Istapunded. http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/82713/ http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/07/phil-bowermaster-on-transhumanfuturist.html Let me post a few comments here (as I'm not able to post them at IEET.org "Interesting how the page you link about Orly Taitz is a "debunker" site devoted to support Obama. But more interesting are the comments there: of five comments we have: 1) "Deport this seditious subversive back to her homeland where she can try her act on Putin." 2) "From the history of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Russian Jew should know better than to play around with forged documents." 3) "Curious, does anyone know if Ms. Taitz is actually in this country legally?" By the way, the article point to the fact that Ms. Taitz is not a natural born citizen. I think her never claimed this. So, what the point? Only a "natural born citizen" have the right to question/argue about someone else status of natural born citizens Calling obamaconspiracy.org an hate site would be wrong? The article is interesting as how the writer choose his examples. He could have taken the "truthers of 9/11" as example instead of the "birthers". They are much more known internationally. But I have this feeling (unsubstantiated, for sure) that he think that attacking "truthers" is not good, as the great majority of them is of the leftist variety and not able to accept opposition to their positions and violence is use more often by the leftists. kurt9 reply is very interesting: "You know, even if I were a flaming liberal, I would still back Peter Thiel's argument. Peter Thiel has no desire to impose his worldview on others. That's why he promotes the seasteading concept. He wants to go somewhere else where he can live out his worldview while not imposing it on others who do not share it. How can anyone object to this? Mike Treder, on the other hand, is opposed to this. He wants to prevent people like Peter Thiel from "leaving" to do something that Mike does not agree with. In other words, Peter is content to allow Mike to do his thing. But Mike is not content to allow Peter to do his thing. Mike is being intolerant, not Peter. Mike has sort of a "Berlin Wall" mentality in that people who disagree with him should not be allowed to "leave" to do their own thing elsewhere. It is because of this "control" mentality that I despise the left (and the religious right) so much. The reason why libertarianism is morally superior to other worldviews is because it does not have this "control" mentality. Indeed, libertarianism exist to oppose this kind of "control" mentality." Mirco From aleksei at iki.fi Sat Aug 8 16:55:18 2009 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 19:55:18 +0300 Subject: [ExI] Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies In-Reply-To: <4A7D908F.60709@libero.it> References: <4A7D908F.60709@libero.it> Message-ID: <1db0b2da0908080955p5e1a14f5rb0187ae01e420549@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Mirco Romanato wrote: > > Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies > http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/treder20090807/ > > It was also Istapunded. > > http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/82713/ > > http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/07/phil-bowermaster-on-transhumanfuturist.html Just to clarify, these two later links were written many days earlier than the first link. They have to do with earlier things Mike Treder has written, but are not comments on this latest silliness of his. -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 18:15:09 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 14:15:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908021422h6e15467g8637cb307e1a6e44@mail.gmail.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: >>> >> ### You are familiar with the finding that for the most part CO2 >> concentration *trails* changes in historical temperatures? In other >> words, CO2 is primarily forced by temperature, with only a secondary >> feedback effect (presumably) acting the other way. > > I'm familiar with that finding, and it's precisely the finding that > got a lot of people worried. We know that CO2 raises temperature. The > ice cores show that, when temperature raise because of Earth's orbital > changes, after a while CO2 goes up too. So you have two effects which > increase each other, a classic case of positive feedback. ### Which prevents you from accurately measuring climate sensitivity to CO2. Actually CO2 sensitivity is not a single number, it is a matrix describing CO2 sensitivities under various conditions, and is still unknown. ---------------------------------- > >> This essentially >> precludes the use of ice core data for the purpose of estimating >> climate sensitivity to CO2. > > On the contrary, it's precisely the raise of CO2 that allows the > estimation: we know how many W/m^2 the orbital forcing does, and other > feedbacks like ice sheets, etc. and thus how much the temperature > should change to bring back the Earth into equilibrium. Turns out this > insufficient to explain the ice age / interglacial cycle. The > additional warming comes from CO2, and can be quantified. That's how > the 3?C/doubling has been estimated. > ### The relative strength of the other feedbacks is unknown (which is why they are absent from current climate models, or guesstimated to fit historical data). ------------------------------ >>> Given that most nations didn't even follow the Kyoto protocol, I find >>> it difficult to understand how one could measure its cost. Can you >>> give me a link for that number? How was it estimated? >> >> http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.html > > That's not estimating anything, just running a counter with numbers. > Since Kyoto has not been implemented by most countries that signed it, > I still think the cost has been near zero. > ### The cost of achieving an effect under Kyoto is as estimated. That governments choose to pretend to subscribe to global warming theories (and thus ratify Kyoto) and then refuse to actually act on the agreement (thus demonstrating lack of belief in global warming), is another issue. -------------------------------------- >> ?Also adaptation cost goes up with >>> time. >> >> ### Really? Why? > > Because, assuming CO2 emissions go on, the warming goes on too. ### Costs of CO2 mitigation also go up with time, if you prefer to look at it this way. The more CO2 emissions you have to prevent, the more you have to pay. --------------------------------------- > > I think that, rather than getting a prediction down the last degree, > you have to show that bad outcomes have significant probability of > occurring. Or do you play Russian roulette often? ### Define bad outcomes, and significant probability. Even the IPCC do not predict a high likelihood of bad outcomes of global warming, AFAIK. Since you asked me about Russian roulette, tell me, do you bet your house on internet stock tips? Or should we avoid asking each other such questions? -------------------------------------- >> ### IPCC reports are an excerpt of data designed to support a >> particular predetermined conclusion, namely the need to expand >> government control of our lives. > > I know that this list has libertarian views but, come on. Renewable > energy is a dynamic market environment with lots of startups and now > some bigger firms. Solar allows distributed energy generation by > individuals. While the technologies that should be phased out are > mostly under government control! ### Renewable energy is almost entirely a creation of government regulators (through subsidies for renewable energy and artificially imposed burdens on effective energy sources, like nuclear or coal). Also, an effect of moral grandstanding by yuppies who always look for ways of showing how much better they are than the unwashed masses. Without these two factors nobody would ever lift a finger to build a windmill, except in some niche off-grid applications. -------------------------------------- > > Leaving apart your conspiracy theories, ### Don't insult me. ------------------------------------- if you think the IPCC gives a > partial view of current scientific opinion, try to find some > significant number of climate scientists with different views. ### Monopsony and political pressure in climate research funding assures that a majority of researchers will toe the line, strive to provide support for the official version and be wary of publishing conflicting data. Look up Lysenkoism for a more crass version. Or read some papers on amyloid and Alzheimer's disease for a spontaneous monopsonistic aberration which occurred even without direct political input. Rafal From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 18:31:01 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:31:01 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4A761F77.6090604@libero.it> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908081131n24077b73i6f1d8c36b38979c2@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > -------------------------------------- >>> ### IPCC reports are an excerpt of data designed to support a >>> particular predetermined conclusion, namely the need to expand >>> government control of our lives. > >> Leaving apart your conspiracy theories, > > ### Don't insult me. I give up. Alfio From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 18:41:48 2009 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:41:48 +0200 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908081131n24077b73i6f1d8c36b38979c2@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030317g523a4e20lf80f6c97cd587475@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908081131n24077b73i6f1d8c36b38979c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4902d9990908081141u3538b119xff15f2ad5c419322@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Rafal > Smigrodzki wrote: > >> -------------------------------------- >>>> ### IPCC reports are an excerpt of data designed to support a >>>> particular predetermined conclusion, namely the need to expand >>>> government control of our lives. >> >>> Leaving apart your conspiracy theories, >> >> ### Don't insult me. > > ?I give up. Just to clarify the reason: I realize that our worldviews are too different. We'll just keep talking past each other forever. Alfio From pharos at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 18:53:22 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 18:53:22 +0000 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: <4902d9990908081141u3538b119xff15f2ad5c419322@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <7641ddc60908030521v22410ef0k3524b0a11f7d0ff0@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908081131n24077b73i6f1d8c36b38979c2@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908081141u3538b119xff15f2ad5c419322@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 8/8/09, Alfio Puglisi wrote: > Just to clarify the reason: I realize that our worldviews are too > different. We'll just keep talking past each other forever. > > That's correct. Rafal (at present) is an extreme sort-of-libertarian of the type that we point at, in order to frighten our children into behaving properly. ;) BillK From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 19:34:00 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:34:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] [wta-talk] Richard Lindzen on climate hysteria In-Reply-To: References: <200908010439.n714dW46013936@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4902d9990908030743y49188b1dp5ff0f8506994ff29@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908051247x47d9a5e6oc933608a3c5880c4@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908060227t14af315cyd4a050bbe5282c49@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908071350t2e173523sa8a33904b31f8c4a@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908071500t477f84b3n6083506604e7909a@mail.gmail.com> <7641ddc60908081115t2b86889emaa4b69d0fad11863@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908081131n24077b73i6f1d8c36b38979c2@mail.gmail.com> <4902d9990908081141u3538b119xff15f2ad5c419322@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908081234q340e059ame0bc6266399b3e1e@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:53 PM, BillK wrote: > > That's correct. > Rafal (at present) is an extreme sort-of-libertarian of the type that > we point at, in order to frighten our children into behaving properly. > ?;) ### This is exactly what I expect from you, Bill. Rafal From max at maxmore.com Sat Aug 8 20:51:06 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:51:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Actual vs. imagined views on global warming Message-ID: <200908082051.n78KpCkD008217@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Once again, Treder is misrepresenting and smearing those with whom he disagrees: http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/treder20090807 I will be posting a response to that blog. For now, I've entered a new blog of my own with my ACTUAL (current) views: http://strategicphilosophy.blogspot.com/2009/08/my-current-view-of-global-warming.html ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Aug 8 20:54:57 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:54:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Re: Who's Developing P2P-L2G Related Software? In-Reply-To: <55ad6af70908081330i4aa81333l47fe006ddba74041@mail.gmail.com> References: <471cdc180908080431s73fe7740ifb60753a8d6a1e45@mail.gmail.com> <55ad6af70908081330i4aa81333l47fe006ddba74041@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908081354q49ee32e6kd5a173622ddab997@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bryan Bishop Date: Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:30 PM Subject: Re: [Open Manufacturing] Re: Who's Developing P2P-L2G Related Software? To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com, kanzure at gmail.com, diybio , diytranshumanist at googlegroups.com On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:04 PM, ecd wrote: > Yo! First post in this group. Found my way here via 4chan, oddly > enough. (/r9k/ -> anarchy discussion -> disclosed some projects of > mine & solicited interest/asked about extant work -> someone linked > Bryan Bishop's page -> "Yo! First post in this group"...) Huh, I haven't hung out in /r9k/ on 4chan in a while- or in fact, ever- so I'm glad to see that you somehow made your way here anyway. > - - - - - - - - SKIP UNLESS YOU'RE INTERESTED IN MY PROJECTS: > > The project I described in the aforementioned thread was essentially > an online (but downloadable) "tech tree". (No, nothing to show at this > point. :( ? ) Since I anticipate the related tools (mainly data Yep, you're in the right place. This is what we're mainly working on here. The project idea has been mentioned in the past (decades ago) hundreds of times over, but nobody has sat down and done it. I found fenn (one of the other committers) by searching around for people interested in David Gingery, and we've been working on this project ever since we met. Smari and Sam Rose and a few others also started emailing around last year about implementing this tech tree. You're welcome to view our progress. http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/ In particular, you can see a taxonomy of manufacturing processes here: http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/taxonomy.yaml You can see some of the details filled out here: http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/processes.yaml You can see an example "package" in skdb, a package for a generic screw: http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/packages/screw/ Ultimately this is hard to explain to individuals who are unfamiliar with the concept of a "tech tree", or "tech graph", or unfamiliar with "apt-get" or other free and open source software package managers. These days I just tend to tell the diybio folks and the openmanufacturing folks that it's "apt-get but for hardware". If you haven't seen the xkcd sandwich reference,-- http://xkcd.com/149/ And of course, someone put some work into that very project already: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/27/sudo-make-me-a-sandw.html So, skdb is "apt-get but for hardware"- the idea is to be able to say "skdb-get install milling-machine", or "skdb-make robot-maid", and then get all of the requisite tools either by getting instructions (computational representations of instructables), or by "opting out" of the tree and just buying some OEM or proprietary components at a certain point-- which I only mention because it's common that people just want a kit, or don't want to have to forge every metal component that they require to carry out their herculean feats. > visualization & interchange (formats, languages, etc.)) will end up > being pretty versatile, I was going to integrate them into a general- > purpose collaboration-oriented website (and other services, if I could > afford it and there was interest), where I'd also host the major > projects that I personally wanted to develop with the tools: So, one front-end idea that I have recently been bouncing around is called "djangit". It's a python + django + git + wiki frontend system. The idea is that many people don't want to hear about the guts of skdb, but at the same time there's no reason to ignore proper revision control systems; simultaneously, implementing in django means that the python modules for skdb can be hooked in easily for rendering of the package data (like the screw package), etc., while still allowing human input over the web if someone so desires. At the moment djangit isn't quite functional because I've been neglecting it for the past few weeks. > ?* the tech tree (multicontextual (historical (from all perspectives)/ > [bio/psycho/socio]logical/cosmic/metaphysical contexts describing the > development and applications of the various techs), and ground-up > (such that someone who could read and had infinite time could proceed > from step one ("find stones that look like this, mash them together > such that they spark, collect hot sparks in dry fibrous material...", > etc.) to building space ships. Yes, I've heard of the Foundation > books. :P ?But no, I've not read them.) In your spare time, you might want to read more about what we've previously said about bootstrapping on this list-- http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/2279e9a23f644639 http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/e4c375acce772250 http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/browse_thread/thread/113d5a39898e061a?hide_quotes=no#msg_2000b6278e1af0ea > ?* major subsets of the tech tree (significant enough to people I care > about/my own interests to warrant their own project pages (while still > referencing&building upon the main body of data)): One of the problems that I continue to come across is that many of the "open source hardware" sites on the web are just keeping photographs of their information, which isn't useful because there's actual engineering information involved that should be uploaded (like a CAD file, etc.). But ultimately, yes, just like the alioth server on debian, it would be useful to have a way to link to individual projects and their presence on the web, yes. > ?-primitive technology (sticks & stones, live off the land, etc.) > ?-chemical (substances, uses, algorithms, models, etc) > ?-CS stuff (for the development of "fluid" operating systems, another > project I've an interest in.) > ?-biological (...I think there's already something like this... MIT?) > ?-materials (processes and tools for production, measurement, > evaluation, etc.) > ?-tools (measurement, manipulation, etc.) > ?-salvage (where to find what in presently available artifacts, why > they're there, and how you can use them) > ?-reverse-engineering (processes, results, tools, etc.) Yep, we seem to be in agreement. > In building a site around this tree, I imagine people (at least > myself) could do write-ups (eg "Using the data in the multimeter > nodes, I've built my own. Here's how I did it..."), and I would feel > immensely fulfilled if people actually devised and contributed novel > techs using the data I hope to accumulate & organize. > I have two ideas that, while probably unoriginal, I think might > distinguish this project: That's one part that the debian community (among others) has solved. It is well known that engineering is not necessarily the most easy task in the world because you can't just "engineer de novo"- it would be pointless to engineer everything under the sun from scratch each time you build it, right? So for this reason, there are already "package maintainers" in the skdb community that accept projects from others and help them "package them up" into the packaging format. This way, everyone can just sit at their computer and say "sudo make me a sandwich" and the computer handles all of the details like ordering inventory, or printing out new lego-manual-style instructions for how to assemble parts into a system that you wanted, etc. For those who run shops or who have large machinery laying around, it would be ideal to allow those machines to assemble the components for you, but that'll lead this discussion off topic fairly quickly. ;-) > 1) on top of all that data, you could overlay data structures that > organize it however you like. You could then share those structures, > edit them, make meta-structures, search algorithms (also sharable!), > etc.. > 2) Up/downloading & persistence - take relevant data with you, keep > your structures and the data they contain sync'd to whatever (and > whoever[']s[']) version you like. Yeah, that's called a version or revision control system. > What can I help with? Perhaps it would be nice to have a master list > (on someone's wiki or something) of who wants/needs what capabilities > (and where they want them - what hardware/microarchitectures/devices/ > modes..), and what currently delivers (free/os or not). I guess I'm We have some of this in the skdb/inventory/ folder but it's not complete. Smari was working on a web interface to this, but he hasn't showed up in the IRC channel (#hplusroadmap on freenode) in a few weeks so I'm not sure what his status is. > asking you specifically (Hi, Nathan! Pleased to meet you :) ? ) to put > some more detail on that page of resources you've started? I see a > list of projects, but I don't have a list of the concrete wants/needs > that they address. Perhaps the rest of you have established enough of > a group-mind to know what the others speak of when mentioning some > project, but I haven't had the initiation. I have absolutely no idea what Nathan is doing with yet another project. We have a lot of momentum here that he's neglecting, and I've invited him to learn more on numerous opportunities, but maybe I'm just getting grumpy and old and grumpy. > What exactly do various people want to do? I know what I want to do, > and I have /some/ technical ability, and if there are already projects > towards similar ends I'd be happy to lend a hand in whatever way I > can. (By the way, I'm glad to see folks here seem cool with each other > working on essentially the same problems in their own way.) I suggest starting off by joining the IRC channel (#hplusroadmap) and saying hi, hanging around and seeing what's up. No doubt that you'll slowly start to get the picture of what some of us are doing (or not doing). > 2) I too am working on a suite of information tools relevant to > collaboration. Great. I hope you know your toolchains well :-). > 3) I am willing to contribute mind/coding power (humble as it may be) > to other collaborative projects. Fantastic, I will eat your brain. > 5) My brain tends to shut down when conversations get too abstract. > Please keep this in mind when communicating with me. I like hard > facts, objectives, and a clear context. (...But when I've completed my > Magnum Opus and I'm finally out from under the thumb of scarcity, I > will thoroughly enjoy philosophizing and mind-masturbating all over > the place - Now with greater [augmented?] intelligence and > experience!) Hah. Well. We have a rule in the channel: no philosophy. We commonly violate it without knowing it, until one of us reminds us of this fact, and we realize we've all been barking up the wrong tree, and get back to more practical work. Anyway, nice to meet you. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 07:32:30 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 09:32:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: This calculator gives the same density for non salt water at 3.74 to 4.23 degrees: 1000.000 Not very acccurate not one you can trust. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 09:19:10 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 09:19:10 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: On 8/9/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > This calculator gives the same density for non salt water at 3.74 to 4.23 > degrees: 1000.000 > > Not very acccurate not one you can trust. > Or maybe exactly accurate, if the density of water doesn't actually change within that specific half degree temperature range when water is at maximum density. See: Quote: The density of water is dependent on its temperature, but the relation is not linear and is not even monotonic (see right-hand table). When cooled from room temperature liquid water becomes increasingly denser, just like other substances. But at approximately 4 ?C, water reaches its maximum density. As it is cooled further under ambient conditions, it expands to become less dense. (Isn't Google marvelous?). BillK From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 10:40:53 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 12:40:53 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: No it isn't. Google provides you with a lot of garbage also. This calculator is just one example. The pressure is also a factor to a water density. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 12:35:41 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 13:35:41 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: On 8/9/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > No it isn't. Google provides you with a lot of garbage also. > > This calculator is just one example. > > The pressure is also a factor to a water density. > This troll is completely clueless, isn't he? No more from me. :) BillK From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 12:56:26 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:56:26 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: Of course. I don't have a clue from where and how the sea might rise for a feet per 100 years, so are everybody else. But it is your claim and you have to submit the credible explanation for it. Meanwhile look at this: http://www.bellrock.org.uk/ For the last 200 years, there was no 60 cm sea level change there. What is especially funny about this alleged sea level rise talking is that it is somehow more intensive on some poor islands. As the seas were not connected. GW trolls rule the world, as we witness. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 14:03:46 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:03:46 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds In-Reply-To: References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com> <577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook> <20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> <2d6187670908052025m77f6e542yf6f995f2e3d3b8c6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908090703o631019e8k8f6194a0de77e999@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > John Grigg>>A concern I have is that as personal high tech weapons/armor get > more and more incredibly sophisticated and >>> >>> powerful, that only the military and police (across the globe) will be >>> allowed access to them. >>> And so as a result the common citizenry will be vulnerable to abuse, on a >>> scale never before seen. >>> It will be sort of like having comic book-style super heroes/villains >>> running around. > > A valid concern. One that in its time was also applicable to the technology required to make steel weapons, was it not? -- Stefano Vaj From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 14:21:58 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:21:58 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies In-Reply-To: <1db0b2da0908080955p5e1a14f5rb0187ae01e420549@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A7D908F.60709@libero.it> <1db0b2da0908080955p5e1a14f5rb0187ae01e420549@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Everybody adheres to some schools of thoughts. Facts decide who was more wrong. Those with the "official thinking of the time" are not especially good at being correct, but are recognized as wise by their contemporaries. Mike Treder is just one of those approval whores. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 14:31:26 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:31:26 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Curves on a graph (was Re: Richard Lindzen onclimatehysteria. In-Reply-To: <2F3DFE0B16054F5B98EF4F1012ED5E02@MyComputer> References: <831572.32801.qm@web27005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <09C3E0B9E1D74B26A80AD198B5C6DEB5@spike> <4902d9990908050700n57df2eb8l7c70556ebcd5d9c7@mail.gmail.com> <2F3DFE0B16054F5B98EF4F1012ED5E02@MyComputer> Message-ID: <580930c20908090731r5d6183fh592a30cbc6f01899@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:06 PM, John K Clark wrote: >> All current evidence points to warming in a medium timescale (100s of >> years) > > 100's of years! To hell with my great great grandchildren, let them fend for > themselves; after all, my great great grandfather didn't worry a lot about > me. It's a little like the Wright Brothers not having the time to develop > their airplane because they were too busy worrying about how people a > century from their time will solve the air traffic control problem. An even more pertinent analogy would be a concern for Hiroshima-like or 9/11-like events. In fact, AFAIK, our distant offspring might even thrive in a warmer climate, or live underwater and promote the expansion of oceans. > More expensive energy doesn't mean fat cats make less money, it means > billions of poor people will control less energy than they do now. A lot > less. ?And that means billions of people will become even poorer than they > are now. A lot poorer. And that means people are going to die. Millions and > millions of people. Or simply will *continue* dying. But this is not, for whatever reason, not considered to be "anthropic", so it appears that many people concern with the biblical consequences of GW (floods-and-deserts, e.g.) can live with well enough with all that... :-) And, we should even count in additional chances for deaths or extinction simply arising from the diversion of efforts and investments which could be applied to other goals. Medicine, e.g.; space colonisation; biotech; etc. I remain perplexed about AGW, and still assume that its "proponents" might be perfectly right. But it is disquieting to see how even in transhumanist ranks all the issues above are dismissed out of hand in favour of being, no matter what, on the "cool" side (pun intended). And since I have no expertise nor training to express a meaningful opinion on the merits, and my claims to competence lay instead in the area of politics, legislative mechanism, mass psychology and cultural trends, I am mostly concerned with those aspects. -- Stefano Vaj From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 14:42:20 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:42:20 +0200 Subject: [ExI] simplifying? In-Reply-To: <1249607504_16452@s6.cableone.net> References: <1249607504_16452@s6.cableone.net> Message-ID: <580930c20908090742h42aa7742ldf54408a90ebab91@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:02 AM, hkhenson wrote: > > I have had an awful time with this complex idea. ?People complain that you > have to be a rocket scientist to read it. ?If anyone has ideas on how to > simplify the explanation while still keeping it accurate, please let me > know, either here or by private email. I think it is fine enough. BTW, the recent re-igniting of the debate on AGW on transhumanist lists brought me back to toying with the idea of making use of nuclear arsenals to power Orion-style vehicles. If, and of course those are big ifs, AGW exists, it is an existential risk, and it would be obviated by a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the "cost" of a modest increase in the environmental radioactivity would be modest in comparison with the biblical alternatives suggested by its partisans - as well as with the not much lesser consequences of much more expensive and scarce energy arising from a simple switching off of fossil fuels sources... Having said that, nothing wrong in considering solutions which may be even closer to the ideal of having your pie and eat it too... -- Stefano Vaj From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 15:12:50 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 01:12:50 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: 2009/8/9 Tomaz Kristan : > This calculator gives the same density for non salt water at 3.74 to 4.23 > degrees: 1000.000 > > Not very acccurate not one you can trust. The following pages confirm that the density of pure water does not vary by more than one part per million in the range 3.6 to 4.4 degrees Celsius: http://faculty.uccb.ns.ca/chowley/chem201/dh20vstemp.htm http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/measurement/faq/water-density.shtm However, they do differ from the calculator I originally quoted in that they give a density of less than 1000.000 kg/m^3 for pure water. Perhaps the first calculator is (mistakenly) referring to specific gravity rather than density. -- Stathis Papaioannou From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 15:42:18 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:42:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: On 8/9/09, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > The following pages confirm that the density of pure water does not > vary by more than one part per million in the range 3.6 to 4.4 degrees > Celsius: > > http://faculty.uccb.ns.ca/chowley/chem201/dh20vstemp.htm > > http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/measurement/faq/water-density.shtml > > However, they do differ from the calculator I originally quoted in > that they give a density of less than 1000.000 kg/m^3 for pure water. > Perhaps the first calculator is (mistakenly) referring to specific > gravity rather than density. > > I don't think that's the reason. This site shows both tables on the same page without explanation. Maybe the slight difference is between pure water and tap water. BillK From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Sun Aug 9 14:19:14 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 07:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] bone loss Message-ID: <583560.48844.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> What is good to treat bone loss? A doctor recommended calcium apatite. ? What else? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 17:12:00 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 18:12:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] bone loss In-Reply-To: <583560.48844.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <583560.48844.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 8/9/09, Post Futurist wrote: > What is good to treat bone loss? > A doctor recommended calcium apatite. > That is a bone strengthening supplement. But treatment depends on the cause of the bone weakness. You need a full diagnosis first. BillK From cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 17:39:16 2009 From: cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:39:16 -0300 Subject: [ExI] Military aims for instant repair of wartime wounds References: <2d6187670908041917p7fa684eo3c01c0193c06ee1a@mail.gmail.com><577C72BBED214AA0A5920FAA8DBFDC74@Notebook><20090805031935022.IAPU18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com><20090806031635844.QCKT18482@cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com><2d6187670908052025m77f6e542yf6f995f2e3d3b8c6@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20908090703o631019e8k8f6194a0de77e999@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ABAFCBD3B4E4A62A447D59A15047777@Notebook> Stefano Vaj> One that in its time was also applicable to the technology required to > make steel weapons, was it not? Or bronze or chipped stone. From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 21:26:56 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 23:26:56 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: If the water has so stable density at its maximum, there will be no "thermal expansion" noticeable.Less than 1 cm per a degree C. Sea rise hysteria not justified. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Aug 9 23:53:08 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:53:08 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: 2009/8/10 BillK : > On 8/9/09, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> The following pages confirm that the density of pure water does not >> ?vary by more than one part per million in the range 3.6 to 4.4 degrees >> ?Celsius: >> >> ?http://faculty.uccb.ns.ca/chowley/chem201/dh20vstemp.htm >> >> ?http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/measurement/faq/water-density.shtml >> >> ?However, they do differ from the calculator I originally quoted in >> ?that they give a density of less than 1000.000 kg/m^3 for pure water. >> ?Perhaps the first calculator is (mistakenly) referring to specific >> ?gravity rather than density. >> >> > > I don't think that's the reason. > This site shows both tables on the same page without explanation. > Maybe the slight difference is between pure water and tap water. > My understanding is that it was originally intended that 1 litre of pure water at 4 degrees Celsius weigh exactly 1kg, but it turned out that the Pt/Ir kilogram standard in Paris actually weighs more than this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram#History -- Stathis Papaioannou From stathisp at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 00:01:32 2009 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:01:32 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: 2009/8/10 Tomaz Kristan : > If the water has so stable density at its maximum, there will be no "thermal > expansion" noticeable.Less than 1 cm per a degree C. > > Sea rise hysteria not justified. The change in density per degree Celsius between 0 and 1 degree Celsius is of the order of 1 part in 10,000. That means a 10cm expansion for a column of water 1km deep. -- Stathis Papaioannou From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 14:13:40 2009 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:13:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Actual vs. imagined views on global warming In-Reply-To: <200908082051.n78KpCkD008217@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908082051.n78KpCkD008217@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <7641ddc60908100713m29f12b3bu9ce69cea08a01957@mail.gmail.com> BTW, I have exactly the same views. On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Max More wrote: > Once again, Treder is misrepresenting and smearing those with whom he > disagrees: > > http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/treder20090807 > > I will be posting a response to that blog. For now, I've entered a new blog > of my own with my ACTUAL (current) views: > > http://strategicphilosophy.blogspot.com/2009/08/my-current-view-of-global-warming.html > > > ------------------------------------- > Max More, Ph.D. > Strategic Philosopher > Extropy Institute Founder > www.maxmore.com > max at maxmore.com > ------------------------------------- From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Aug 10 14:36:08 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:36:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] bone loss In-Reply-To: <583560.48844.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <583560.48844.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C51245292D24915B967EA5F2CD15338@DFC68LF1> I was diagnosed with bone loss several years ago. I continue working out with weights (body sculpting for muscle development which also helps bone density), and now take 2,000 vitamin D, along with my calcium. For 6 months I was on Boniva. I made a Bio Art DVD on titled "Bone Density" which was featured at the Moscow at the "Art and Science in the Post-Biological Age" http://videodoc.ncca-kaliningrad.ru/participants/ii-limits-of-modeling/natas ha-vita-more-usa/ http://videodoc.ncca-kaliningrad.ru/participants/ii-limits-of-modeling/ I'm assuming that you had a whole body scan and the doc saw where you bone loss resides. You will have another one in a year to see the rate of loss or if it has declined. You can reverse it now, with Boniva and similar medications. But if your loss is minimal, the calcium with vitamin D, and exercise will help. Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Post Futurist Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 9:19 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] bone loss What is good to treat bone loss? A doctor recommended calcium apatite. What else? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 731 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Aug 10 14:38:17 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:38:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism, and Other Fantasies In-Reply-To: References: <4A7D908F.60709@libero.it><1db0b2da0908080955p5e1a14f5rb0187ae01e420549@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1CA143E0932C42BAA739CE0EA55F85CA@DFC68LF1> It is unacceptable to name call on this list. Apologize or leave the list now. Sincerely, Natasha Vita-More Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tomaz Kristan Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 9:22 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Creationism, Birtherism, Singularitarianism,and Other Fantasies Everybody adheres to some schools of thoughts. Facts decide who was more wrong. Those with the "official thinking of the time" are not especially good at being correct, but are recognized as wise by their contemporaries. Mike Treder is just one of those approval whores. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 731 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 02:03:53 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:33:53 +0930 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908101903m2afb3ef9v1477e3763da4a0c1@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/9 BillK : > On 8/9/09, Tomaz Kristan wrote: >> No it isn't. Google provides you with a lot of garbage also. >> >> This calculator is just one example. >> >> The pressure is also a factor to a water density. >> > > > This troll is completely clueless, isn't he? > > No more from me. ?:) > > BillK But Bill, http://xkcd.com/386/ ! -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From pharos at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 07:57:33 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 08:57:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0908101903m2afb3ef9v1477e3763da4a0c1@mail.gmail.com> References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> <710b78fc0908101903m2afb3ef9v1477e3763da4a0c1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 8/11/09, Emlyn wrote: > But Bill, > http://xkcd.com/386/ > or even, :) BillK From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 12:14:54 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:14:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [tt] [p2p-research] Possible prize for RepRap In-Reply-To: <20090811112900.GQ25322@leitl.org> References: <20090811112900.GQ25322@leitl.org> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908110514y4c059e49hcceeec59966d50d4@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eugen Leitl Date: Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:29 AM Subject: [tt] [p2p-research] Possible prize for RepRap To: tt at postbiota.org ----- Forwarded message from Edward Miller ----- From: Edward Miller Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:28:58 -0500 To: p2presearch at listcultures.org Subject: [p2p-research] Possible prize for RepRap ? The Foresight Institute seems to be offering a prize for RepRap. ? Perhaps the P2P meme finally infecting the futurist and transhumanist ? communities.... mwuhahaha ? [1]http://dev.forums.reprap.org/read.php?1,25671 References ? 1. http://dev.forums.reprap.org/read.php?1,25671 _______________________________________________ p2presearch mailing list p2presearch at listcultures.org http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A ?7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE _______________________________________________ tt mailing list tt at postbiota.org http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/tt -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 14:52:51 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:52:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [tt] [Open Manufacturing] FastForward Radio at 10:30pm EST tonight on abundance; Joseph Jackson & Paul Fernhout In-Reply-To: <20090811144342.GK25322@leitl.org> References: <20090811144342.GK25322@leitl.org> Message-ID: <55ad6af70908110752h18133c2u873c6886dc7a94e2@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eugen Leitl Date: Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:43 AM Subject: [tt] [Open Manufacturing] FastForward Radio at 10:30pm EST tonight on abundance; Joseph Jackson & Paul Fernhout To: tt at postbiota.org ----- Forwarded message from "Paul D. Fernhout" ----- From: "Paul D. Fernhout" Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:42:44 -0400 To: Open Manufacturing Subject: [Open Manufacturing] FastForward Radio at 10:30pm EST tonight on ?abundance; Joseph Jackson & Paul Fernhout User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) Reply-To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com At 10:30pm EST (7:30pm PST) tonight, Joseph Jackson and I will be talking with other panelists on "FastForward Radio" about "The End of Scarcity and the Age of Abundance" here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/fastforwardradio """ What would life be like in a world without poverty? How about a world in which everyone is, essentially, rich? The answer may be just around the corner. Phil Bowermaster and Stephen Gordon welcome a panel of futurists to discuss how the end of scarcity will revolutionize society, the economy, and life as we know it. """ There usually is some sort of related chat or sometimes other callers. Joseph is an old hand at this sort of thing and has been on the program before, so he's the one to blame for getting me involved. :-) I'm still not sure I should be crawling out of my email cave to do this, but it sounded like fun at the time. :-) It certainly has been a lot of fun to listen to previous episodes of that show to prepare for being on it. While time will be limited, I hope to bring up some of the themes we have discussed here, including that technological humanism, transhumanism, and the singularity are three different issues, even if overlapping and interrelated. I've also been rereading parts of Paula Underwood's "The Walking People" which is a written version of a Native American oral history, and includes the story of how a community connected themselves together using ropes to cross the Bering Straits, in such a way as so individuals could still do things, and individuals still had local food and water, but all benefited from the power of the group (some internet and open manufacturing parallels there in relation to the singularity, I think. :-) Anyway, I guess it is a first tentative step towards reaching an audience with low literacy rates, as we discussed here earlier. :-) If anyone has some important ideas in relation to open manufacturing I should think about including, feel free to mention them in reply. I can't promise any specific stuff will come up, depending on the flow of the conversation, my memory on the spot, etc. --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group. To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A ?7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE _______________________________________________ tt mailing list tt at postbiota.org http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/tt -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From protokol2020 at gmail.com Tue Aug 11 16:58:39 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:58:39 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Sea level rise In-Reply-To: References: <7641ddc60908071352h524961b9q52d8a71a17d6dbde@mail.gmail.com> <20090807210305.I9FAY.78365.root@hrndva-web26-z01> <710b78fc0908101903m2afb3ef9v1477e3763da4a0c1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: You can joke as you want, but how can you explain those 30 cm of thermal sea expansion per 100 years? Are you saying, that the sea is warmer 1 degree Celsius every century? Are you saying that an invisible Amazon is somewhere we don't know about? You can only joke a little. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Tue Aug 11 00:43:58 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] wireless pacemaker Message-ID: <987878.31058.qm@web59908.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> First wireless pacemaker in U.S. gives patient freedom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Wed Aug 12 01:49:49 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:49:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] osteoporosis drug Message-ID: <880776.76927.qm@web59916.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Studies say a new osteoporosis drug cuts fracture risk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Aug 13 17:31:07 2009 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:31:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Robert Heinlein's home Message-ID: <200908131834.n7DIYqWR027080@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Per cable news, brush fires are threatening 300 homes in the Bonny Doon area by Santa Cruz where the Heinleins lived. I don't know if their house is one of the ones designated At Risk but it doesn't matter much -- if it isn't yet, it easily could be. -- David Lubkin. From pharos at gmail.com Thu Aug 13 19:19:43 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:19:43 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Robert Heinlein's home In-Reply-To: <200908131834.n7DIYqWR027080@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908131834.n7DIYqWR027080@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/13/09, David Lubkin wrote: > Per cable news, brush fires are threatening 300 homes in the Bonny Doon area > by Santa Cruz where the Heinleins lived. I don't know if their house is one > of the ones designated At Risk but it doesn't matter much -- if it isn't > yet, it easily could be. > News reports say that a mandatory evacuation of Bonny Doon has been ordered. The Heinlein house is on Bonny Doon Road, to the north of the town and nearer the fire, so I expect it is one of those under threat. BillK From natasha at natasha.cc Fri Aug 14 00:23:26 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:23:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] AA - Advantage Miles Needed Message-ID: <20090813202326.yig4cerw4iok8o40@webmail.natasha.cc> Greetings - Just a quick question: Does anyone have extra American Airlines Advantage Miles they want to give away or sell to me? I have several international flights to book and have run out of miles! If you do, please email me off list: natasha at natasha.cc Many thanks, Natasha From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri Aug 14 15:12:36 2009 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:12:36 +0200 Subject: [ExI] AA - Advantage Miles Needed In-Reply-To: <20090813202326.yig4cerw4iok8o40@webmail.natasha.cc> References: <20090813202326.yig4cerw4iok8o40@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: off topic, IMO On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 2:23 AM, wrote: > Greetings - > > Just a quick question: Does anyone have extra American Airlines > Advantage Miles they want to give away or sell to me? I have several > international flights to book and have run out of miles! > > If you do, please email me off list: natasha at natasha.cc > > Many thanks, > Natasha > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Aug 15 19:47:11 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:47:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] AA - Advantage Miles Needed In-Reply-To: References: <20090813202326.yig4cerw4iok8o40@webmail.natasha.cc> Message-ID: <37D8C1F1F4F549509E57A8C42E10E6D0@DFC68LF1> Got them! Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More _____ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 731 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Aug 15 19:50:14 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:50:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] MEDIA: French TV Needs Transhumanist Location - LA or New York Message-ID: Does anyone know of a cool H+ location for a French TV crew to perform an interview? They had wanted to use the Singularity Unversity, because they are interviewing Ray there, but for me that is not an appropriate location. The producers are looking at LA or Manhattan. Suggestions welcome. Many thanks, Natasha Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 731 bytes Desc: not available URL: From eschatoon at gmail.com Sun Aug 16 15:35:50 2009 From: eschatoon at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco (2nd email)) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:35:50 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil speaks at the Second Life Community Convention Message-ID: <1fa8c3b90908160835j48379964ye0e59a70a53806d8@mail.gmail.com> http://cosmi2le.com/index.php?/site/ray_kurzweil_speaks_at_the_second_life_community_convention/ In the picture, the only image that I have found of Ray?s avatar Kurzweil Tomorrow (via Flickr). I really want to watch the talk, I hope someone made a recording and will post it somewhere. This is the text coverage of Ray Kurzweil talk at the Second Life Community Convention that I have found so far. New World Notes When Schlink Lardner and I arrived late to Ray Kurzweil?s opening keynote of SLCC, we were greeted by his disembodied voice emanating from a hot brunette named Kurzweil Tomorrow. No, Ray hasn?t uploaded his consciousness into the metaverse (yet), he?s just streaming his talk to this San Francisco ballroom from a convention in Boston. SLCC?s Rhiannon Chatnoir handles the feed from the back. In twenty years, he predicts, we won?t be able to distinguish SL bots from humans. Avatar Planet Blog Day two of the Second Life Community Conference went smoothly. Attendees arrived, were issued their badges and SLCC teeshirts, and proceeded to Grand Ballroom for the morning?s keynote speaker, the legendary technology visionary Ray Kurzweil. However, Kurzweil wasn?t there. At least not in person. He was in Second Life, and delivering his talk via streaming media to the audience assembled in the St. Francis Hotel, who watched his avatar speaking on two large projections screens. He spoke of the exponential growth of technology leading to changes in society that are much faster than the linear growth frequently forecast by economic modelers and spoke about the six paradigms of the grown of technology The First Paradigm began with the 1890 census, the first to be conducted with the then startling new tecnology of punch cards. Kurzweil projects that the current Fifth Paradigm, based on Moore?s Law projecting the growth in power of computers, will end around 2020 and will be supplanted by the Sixth Paradigm, molecular computing. Kurzweil addressed far more than can be covered here. For more information, go to his website http://www.KurzWeilaAI.net. MixedRealities In his keynote speech Ray Kurzweil definitely pointed to revolution. The human evolution is accelerating rapidly. Totally disruptive paradigm shifts are taking place. Kurzweil presented from Second Life, taking the shape of a woman avatar with red lips and long black hair. This was a statement of course: Kurzweil appreciates the possibilities of virtually becoming another body. One of his basic assumptions is that information technology is expanding into all fields, and together with exponential progress in nano-technology this leads to all kinds of fascinating (r)evolutions. Kurzweil for instance is convinced that people will be able to ?feel? the virtual environment using nano-devices in their body - giving the notion ?immersiveness? a new dimension. See also the very interesting post of Dusan Writer SECOND LIFE: WHAT?S NEXT - REPORT FROM SLCC 09, on two different but (I think) complementary roadmaps for Second Life. Interesting (second) times ahead. I am sure we will see many new and exciting things in Second Life soon. Probably Second Life was not dead, just quiet and mot making much noise for a while, and we will here much more noise about it soon. -- Giulio Prisco http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco aka Eschatoon Magic http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 18 11:42:33 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:42:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [tt] NS 2640: Review: Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55ad6af70908180442qb293e8eidb4d7cc40df124a8@mail.gmail.com> Of course, the review doesn't consider amateurs who freely devote their time :-) and don't necessarily need old-world economics. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Premise Checker Date: Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:44 AM Subject: [tt] NS 2640: Review: Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology To: Transhuman Tech NS 2640: Review: Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology by Janet Hope http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19726406.000-review-biobazaar-the-open-source-revolution-and-biotechnology-by-janet-hope.html?full=true&print=true * Book information * Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology by Janet Hope * Published by: Harvard University Press * Price: $27.95 * ISBN: 9780674026353 RETURNING to school for a refresher course in biotechnology, Janet Hope becomes alarmed when each concept is presented along with a corporate logo and ownership claim. Here's a technique, her professor tells her: expression of proinsulin in E. coli--"owned" by Hoechst and Eli Lilly. And here's another: expression of mini-proinsulin in S. cerevisae--"owned" by Novo Nordisk. Hope's fellow students are focused on careers in the corporate world, a focus that seems to overshadow any wonder about science itself. She contrasts this state of affairs to that of free software development, an area that earlier caught her fancy when she heard a talk by free software guru Richard Stallman. In the world of free software, freedom and openness are defining principles of a new model of social organisation involving collaboration between peers and a "bazaar"-style production model without formal hierarchies. In Biobazaar, Hope attempts to apply the principles of free software to biotechnology. The book is centred on what she refers to as the "irresistible analogy" between the two fields. But while the analogy works some of the time, at other times it is strained. It works best in asking how a research community can use licensing strategies to protect scientific knowledge from enclosure by corporate interests. It is least persuasive in providing a business model for new drug development. The open source software movement is built on innovative intellectual property licences. The most influential is the Free Software Foundation's GNU General Public License. GPL grants a "copyleft" licence that allows people to take freely shared software code and modify it, so long as they make their modified version freely available under the same GPL terms. Can a GPL-style licensing strategy protect biotechnology research from proprietary controls? Hope reports on efforts to do just that, and the frustrations that accompany them. The Human Genome Project, for example, rejected a restrictive licensing strategy and made important genomic information publicly available, but now faces increasing threats from an explosion of patents that limit the rights of researchers to use that information. The International HapMap project cataloguing common human genetic variants employed a copyleft-type clause that prohibited users from patenting their data, but ultimately abandoned this approach because it led to difficulties when trying to incorporate the project's data into other genomic databases. Among the core difficulties in adopting the software model to biotechnology is the nature of the rights themselves. Unlike lines of software code, data doesn't qualify for copyright protection so, at least in the US, it can't be both public and protected. Inventions can be patented and licensed, but that is costly. Even if one could design legal strategies to "copyleft" biotechnology, would it, or should it, catch on? There is a tension between a researcher's desire for freedom to operate and his or her need to ensure financial returns for investors, and this has to be resolved before the principles of free software can be applied to biotechnology. As long as proprietary control ensures investors' returns, it will be difficult to stop researchers and companies from legally enclosing medical knowledge. Wishing it were not so isn't enough. One has to explain where the money will come from, and Hope only hints at some solutions. There's a tension between researchers and private investors More government grants, for instance, might help, but there has to be space for competition and private-sector decision-making. Hope cites a proposal by Tim Hubbard and myself for the creation of "competitive intermediaries", privately managed R&D outfits that invest in open source projects. They would be financed by contributions from individuals and companies, who would be required by law to pay into the fund of their choice. Separately, many are calling for a vastly expanded role for prizes to replace marketing monopolies as the source of income for drug developers. So can the lessons of open source software be applied to biotechnology? The answer is a qualified yes. There is much to be learned and replicated from the free software field, but the differences are also important. Are we on the verge of an open source revolution? If not a revolution, surely a growing rebellion. Hope gives us food for thought on the possibilities. James Love is director of Knowledge Ecology International in Washington DC _______________________________________________ tt mailing list tt at postbiota.org http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/tt -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Aug 18 15:25:21 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:25:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" Message-ID: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> I have a new (free) science fiction story up at Tor.com: with a personal intro at: and a Listen option, read Australianly by me. Enjoy! (If that's the word I'm looking for...) Damien Broderick From lubkin at unreasonable.com Tue Aug 18 22:01:59 2009 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:01:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] RIP Rose Friedman Message-ID: <200908160251.n7G2pMQ3004261@reva.xtremeunix.com> Libertarian Rose Friedman has died at age 97. Wife (and long-time collaborator) of Milton, mother of David, grandmother of Patri, all consequential figures in our community. She's seen in full flourish on BookTV, in the In Depth interview she and Milton did in 2000. -- David. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 06:13:44 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:43:44 +0930 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" In-Reply-To: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> References: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/19 Damien Broderick : > I have a new (free) science fiction story up at Tor.com: > > > > with a personal intro at: > > > > and a Listen option, read Australianly by me. > > Enjoy! (If that's the word I'm looking for...) > > Damien Broderick You pimped this too quickly; I just saw it there and was about to do the plug for you, dammit. Nice one. -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 19 06:32:16 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:32:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A8B9C70.4050105@satx.rr.com> On 8/19/2009 1:13 AM, Emlyn wrote: > You pimped this too quickly; I just saw it there and was about to do > the plug for you, dammit. > > Nice one. Don't stint yourself, my good man! Pimp away on my behalf post facto! :) Howz tricks in Oz? I assume everything's dried up and blown away. But can't be worse than fucking San Antonio, where it's been >100F for more than a month, nary a drop of water from the sky. We'll all be rooned. Damien From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 06:42:07 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:12:07 +0930 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" In-Reply-To: <4A8B9C70.4050105@satx.rr.com> References: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> <4A8B9C70.4050105@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908182342x6e487feeva8444798357f48aa@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/19 Damien Broderick : > On 8/19/2009 1:13 AM, Emlyn wrote: >> >> You pimped this too quickly; I just saw it there and was about to do >> the plug for you, dammit. >> >> Nice one. > > Don't stint yourself, my good man! Pimp away on my behalf post facto! :) > > Howz tricks in Oz? I assume everything's dried up and blown away. But can't > be worse than fucking San Antonio, where it's been >100F for more than a > month, nary a drop of water from the sky. We'll all be rooned. > > Damien > It's winter in Adelaide, so dry and warm, very pleasant, but we'll all die in the fires come the summer months, according to the radio. As for pimping, I'll sample the merchandise first, a bit later on tonight. But I'm sure it rocks. I'd never heard of Cordwainer Smith, there's one for my list. -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 19 06:52:26 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:52:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0908182342x6e487feeva8444798357f48aa@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> <4A8B9C70.4050105@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182342x6e487feeva8444798357f48aa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A8BA12A.2020108@satx.rr.com> On 8/19/2009 1:42 AM, Emlyn wrote: > I'd never heard of Cordwainer Smith, there's one for my list. Dear godawmighty. The greatest strangest sf writer ever to write about and in Australia--even though he was a CIA psywar spook visiting the place. Godson of Sun Yat-Sen, multilingual genius. There's a little intro on the Tor.com page about my quest for the great man, and how he slipped through my fingers to my endless regret. Damien Broderick From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 07:04:28 2009 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:34:28 +0930 Subject: [ExI] "The Ruined Queen of Harvest World" In-Reply-To: <4A8BA12A.2020108@satx.rr.com> References: <4A8AC7E1.60809@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182313u242873b1y26f81307fcb5dd31@mail.gmail.com> <4A8B9C70.4050105@satx.rr.com> <710b78fc0908182342x6e487feeva8444798357f48aa@mail.gmail.com> <4A8BA12A.2020108@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0908190004m48af97f0r75e08dd8e0937fd3@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/19 Damien Broderick : > On 8/19/2009 1:42 AM, Emlyn wrote: > >> I'd never heard of Cordwainer Smith, there's one for my list. > > Dear godawmighty. The greatest strangest sf writer ever to write about and > in Australia--even though he was a CIA psywar spook visiting the place. > Godson of Sun Yat-Sen, multilingual genius. There's a little intro on the > Tor.com page about my quest for the great man, and how he slipped through my > fingers to my endless regret. Which is here: http://www.tor.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=blog&id=50231 And the snake swallows its own tail... -- Emlyn http://emlyntech.wordpress.com - coding related http://point7.wordpress.com - ranting http://emlynoregan.com - main site From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 14:11:50 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:11:50 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Space-based Solar Power In-Reply-To: <580930c20908170457s7ff8c840j152318c93346ce32@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20908170457s7ff8c840j152318c93346ce32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908190711q5a202718obecd6c277a0602de@mail.gmail.com> Has anybody at hand the URL of what you would consider the best Web source for SBSP advocacy, with data, comparison with other "alternative" energies, etc.? The language is irrelevant. Thank you in advance, -- Stefano Vaj From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 15:20:01 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:20:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Space-based Solar Power In-Reply-To: <580930c20908190711q5a202718obecd6c277a0602de@mail.gmail.com> References: <580930c20908170457s7ff8c840j152318c93346ce32@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20908190711q5a202718obecd6c277a0602de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 8/19/09, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Has anybody at hand the URL of what you would consider the best Web > source for SBSP advocacy, with data, comparison with other > "alternative" energies, etc.? The language is irrelevant. > go to and search the site for space-based solar power or solar power satellites or similar. He has often discussed this subject and links to many sites. BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Aug 19 16:35:28 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:35:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Space-based Solar Power In-Reply-To: References: <580930c20908170457s7ff8c840j152318c93346ce32@mail.gmail.com> <580930c20908190711q5a202718obecd6c277a0602de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908190935w68f7a273yaf897c58317055e6@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/19 BillK : > go to > and search the site for space-based solar power > or solar power satellites > or similar. Thank you. Even though I was hoping for a SBSP-dedicated advocacy site... -- Stefano Vaj From scerir at libero.it Wed Aug 19 16:57:34 2009 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:57:34 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ExI] Krauss Message-ID: <31130980.996081250701054934.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> it seems that Lawrence Krauss is talking here about a (one-way?) manned space travel http://www.abc.net.au/classic/throsby/ (follow the link to your preferred podcast form a bit down the page) From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Wed Aug 19 22:37:14 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:37:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] a new twist Message-ID: <494440.74703.qm@web59905.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> a gold medalist's identity: Gender test for track star -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Thu Aug 20 22:33:13 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:33:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. Message-ID: <200908202300.n7KN04Rf008981@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32477402/ns/health-aging/ ATLANTA - U.S. life expectancy has risen to a new high, now standing at nearly 78 years, the government reported Wednesday. The increase is due mainly to falling death rates in almost all the leading causes of death. The average life expectancy for babies born in 2007 is nearly three months greater than for children born in 2006. ...The death rate has been falling for eight straight years, and is half of what it was 60 years ago. Heart disease and cancer together are the cause of nearly half of U.S. fatalities. The death rate from heart disease dropped nearly 5 percent in 2007, and the cancer death rate fell nearly 2 percent, according to the report. The HIV death rate dropped 10 percent, the biggest one-year decline in 10 years. The diabetes death rate fell about 4 percent, allowing Alzheimer's disease to surpass diabetes to become the sixth leading cause of death. ... Also see: 100-year-olds' club is starting to get crowded http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32009767/ns/health-aging/ Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Aug 21 04:42:43 2009 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:42:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Short-Term Predictions References: <2d6187670811092138i1b4298b0xa34b78cc7b77b89d@mail.gmail.com><200811100602.mAA62qOo024437@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <2d6187670811101920v2756c67q50fd17030894d8e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <07B13102B8BE493397C014FB2B33C893@patrick4ezsk6z> Sony played this video at their Executive Conference this year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 21 08:03:17 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:03:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. In-Reply-To: <200908202300.n7KN04Rf008981@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908202300.n7KN04Rf008981@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/20/09, Max More wrote: > Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32477402/ns/health-aging/ > > ATLANTA - U.S. life expectancy has risen to a new high, now standing at > nearly 78 years, the government reported Wednesday. > > The increase is due mainly to falling death rates in almost all the leading > causes of death. The average life expectancy for babies born in 2007 is > nearly three months greater than for children born in 2006. > > ...The death rate has been falling for eight straight years, and is half of > what it was 60 years ago. > > Heart disease and cancer together are the cause of nearly half of U.S. > fatalities. The death rate from heart disease dropped nearly 5 percent in > 2007, and the cancer death rate fell nearly 2 percent, according to the > report. > That's the good news. Now for the bad news. The figures are from 2007. Pre-depression. Expect worsening death figures for 2008, 2009, 2010. Other countries also improved, so the US is still way down the list. Those living longer now grew up in the 1930s to 50s before the present obesity epidemic in the US. Look behind the total stats. The US is becoming two nations. One is rich and long-lived, the other is poor and short-lived. A National Health Service should help this situation. Another point is that the US is a pretty dangerous place. Non-health related deaths are a significant factor. But, still, an improvement is still an improvement. Mustn't grumble too much! ;) BillK From eschatoon at gmail.com Fri Aug 21 08:27:32 2009 From: eschatoon at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco (2nd email)) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 10:27:32 +0200 Subject: [ExI] =?windows-1252?q?Fwd=3A_=5BCosmic_Engineers=5D_Bill_Bainbri?= =?windows-1252?q?dge=92s_=93Religion_for_a_Galactic_Civilization_2?= =?windows-1252?q?=2E0=94?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1fa8c3b90908210127v60a997e6o1d272cb5a9820b55@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Giulio Prisco Date: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM Subject: [Cosmic Engineers] Bill Bainbridge?s ?Religion for a Galactic Civilization 2.0? To: cosmeng at googlegroups.com, cosmic-engineers at googlegroups.com, transumanisti at yahoogroups.com http://cosmi2le.com/index.php?/site/bill_bainbridges_religion_for_a_galactic_civilization_2.0/ Religions for a Galactic Civilization is an old (1981) article by William Sims Bainbridge. One of my first impressions after reading ?Religions for a Galactic Civilization? for the first time was that it is dated (well, it was written 26 years ago). I wrote: ?If Bill were to write the same article today, he would probably mention NBIC technologies (nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive sciences) besides space travel and colonization. I hope he would give less space to Scientology, and I am sure he would discuss the works of transhumanist thinkers in great detail. I think the first sentence quoted below could be written, today, as ?We need a new transhumanist social movement capable of giving a sense of transcendent purpose to dominant sectors of the society??. I asked Bill to write a revised and updated version of the paper, to be published (translated into Italian) on the print journal Divenire of the Italian Transhumanist Association and discussed at the TransVision 2010 conference. A first draft of the revised and updated version has just been posted to the IEET blog. Religion for a Galactic Civilization 2.0 is one of those seminal articles which some readers love, other readers hate, but all readers find interesting and mind changing. I loved the strong statement at the beginning of the article, ?we need a new definition of spaceflight that will energize investment and innovation. I suggest a return to the traditional view: The heavens are a sacred realm, that we should enter in order to transcend death.?. ?As I hoped, the revised and updated version of the article is informed by current science and technology, and the work of transhumanist thinkers. Bainbrodge understands that the current stagnation of spaceflight is, basically, a motivational problem, and proposes a solution: ?creation of a galactic civilization may depend upon the emergence of a galactic religion capable of motivating society for the centuries required to accomplish that great project. This religion would be a very demanding social movement, and will require extreme discipline from its members, so for purposes of this essay I will call it The Cosmic Order.?. The first version of the Religion for a Galactic Civilization text has inspired the founders of the Order of Cosmic Engineers, and I look forward to the impact of the second version on the evolution of this organization. Let?s build the Cosmic Order! Bill is not afraid to present grand Stapledonian cosmic visions of galactic civilizations of godlike ex-humans roaming the universe as immortal uploads. Galactic civilizations and mind uploading were also discussed by Martine Rothblatt recently, in a great Second Life talk where she said ?the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 reminds us of the imperative to move outwards?we must get religiously fanatic about galactic colonization?, and discussed mind uploading in the context of galactic colonization?the presence of uploaded minds in self-replicating probes to colonize the galaxy?and invited the audience to start a gradual, non destructive mind upload process by building a mindfile via her CyBeRev project to upload to self replicating spacecraft take part in the future cosmic adventures of our species. Bill?s favorite approach to mind uploading is very similar to Martine?s: ?Actual everlasting life will be possible in the near future, using a combination of advanced technologies that have been developed for other purposes (Moravec 1988; Kurzweil 1999; Bainbridge 2003, 2004, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c, 2006d, 2007a, 2007c). The process will be complex, but in outline form it consists of four stages. First, you will be recorded: all your memories, personality, skills, physical characteristics and genetic inheritance. Second, this information will be entered into a vast computerized data base, so that future generations can draw upon your experiences and you can continue to be part of this world after your death. Third, your data will be transported by robot spacecraft or radio transmission to the solar system of a distant star, where a new colony is to be established. Fourth, you will be reconstituted from the recording and begin a new life in a fresh, young body as a colonist of the new world.?. I think this approach to uploading is basically correct, but I also think it can only work in practice with neural BCI (Brain-Computer Interfaces) order of magnitude faster than current person-computer interfaces. However, such interfaces are being slowly but steadily developed in research and commercial labs around the world, and we may see some relevant advances soon. One of the first application fields for fast BCI is the development of better user interfaces for VR worlds, also discussed in depth in Bainbrodge?s article. Summary: the article is excellent, refreshingly irreverent and unPC, and important. Go read Bill?s article now! One PS comment: it may seem that the wildly transhumanist, cosmic approach of Bainbridge?s Religion for a Galactic Civilization 2.0 is very different from the technoprogressive, down-to-earth approach of Treder?s Meanwhile, People Are Dying, published on the IEET site a few days ago. But I think the two approaches are compatible, complementary and mutually reinforcing. Achieving Bill?s vision will require working pragmatically in today?s world in order to make it better day-by-day, while the prospect of Bill?s Galactic Civilization can provide us, here and now, with the required energy, motivation and drive. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cosmic Engineers" group. To post to this group, send email to cosmic-engineers at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cosmic-engineers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cosmic-engineers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- -- Giulio Prisco http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco aka Eschatoon Magic http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon From max at maxmore.com Fri Aug 21 15:34:38 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 10:34:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. Message-ID: <200908211534.n7LFYl0m009894@andromeda.ziaspace.com> >The figures are from 2007. Pre-depression. Expect worsening death >figures for 2008, 2009, 2010. Why do you expect a worsening for the next few years in particular? Is the economic downturn really having that much of an effect on the longevity numbers? (I'm not saying it's not true; I just haven't seen evidence for it and would be (un)happy to be directed to it.) >Those living longer now grew up in the 1930s to 50s before the >present obesity epidemic in the US. Yes, obesity and other self-inflicted problems may well put a stop -- at least for a while -- to further gains, or at least slow them down. This is true of most other wealthy countries too. It's just that the US leads the way. BTW, I find it odd that it's hard to find figures on life expectancy for Hispanics in the US, even though the same is not true for blacks. Does anyone have a good source on this? (A quick look at the CDC's site didn't immediately yield that data except for infant mortality.) >Look behind the total stats. The US is becoming two nations. One is >rich and long-lived, the other is poor and short-lived. A National >Health Service should help this situation. Another point is that the >US is a pretty dangerous place. Non-health related deaths are a >significant factor. Ah, the expected response! But why would a National Health Service help the situation when-- as you say yourself -- "non-health related deaths are a significant factor"? It seems pretty clear that it is poor health-affecting behaviors that are the major problem, not medical care. And, to whatever extent it *is* medical care differences, no NHS is needed (with all its obvious downsides). Tax-subsidized universal health care combined with a freer market in health care should be far superior. Thomas Sowell says some things about this, here: http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/08/19/whose_medical_decisions_part_ii?page=2 One of the many phony arguments for government-controlled medical care is that Americans do not have any longer life expectancy than in other countries, despite much higher medical expenditures. This argument is phony because longevity depends on health-- and "health care" and "medical care" are not the same, no matter how many times the two are confused in the media or in politics. Health care includes things that doctor cannot do much about. Homicide affects your longevity but there is not much that doctors can do about it when they arrive on the scene after you have been shot through the heart, except fill out the paperwork. Rates of homicide, obesity and narcotics usage are higher here than in many other countries, reducing our longevity. But in the things that medical care can do something about-- like cancer survival rates-- the United States ranks at or near the top in the world. But that can change if we give up the real benefits of a top medical system for the visions and rhetoric of politicians. ----------------- Additional thoughts here: Race, Income, Geography Influence US Life Expectancy Contributed by Tom Harrison| 12 September, 2006 03:13 GMT http://health.dailynewscentral.com/content/view/0002418/42/ Although the average life span in the US continues to rise, gaps in life expectancy have changed little from 1982 to 2001. There is a wide gulf -- as much as 33 years -- between those who enjoy the best health and those who are most likely to suffer from illnesses, according to a new study published in PLoS Medicine. The primary cause of the disparities between racial and geographic groups is early death from chronic disease and injuries, an analysis of data from the Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics showed. The differences were attributed to a combination of injuries and such preventable risk factors as smoking, alcohol, obesity, high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol, diet and physical inactivity -- particularly among people from 15 years to 59 years of age. They were not due to income, insurance, infant mortality, AIDS or violence, said the study's lead investigator, Christopher J.L. Murray, director of the Harvard Initiative for Global Health. Personal choices could be more important than access to medical care in improving life expectancy, Dr. Murray noted. Half of the people who have high-blood pressure fail to get it controlled, two-thirds of those with high cholesterol do not get medication to lower it, and two-thirds of diabetics fail to manage the disease, in spite of the fact that 85 percent of the population overall has health insurance. ---------------- The U.S. medical system definitely needs major reform (but not in the direction of more state control). However, citing the lower average life expectancy compared to other countries as evidence of the system's inferiority seems to me to be either ignorant or dishonest, given the utterly different demographics. Compare more similar parts of the US population to that of other rich countries and the lag disappears. Let's keep the debate based on sensible comparisons. Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From pharos at gmail.com Fri Aug 21 16:21:00 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:21:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. In-Reply-To: <200908211534.n7LFYl0m009894@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908211534.n7LFYl0m009894@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/21/09, Max More wrote: > Why do you expect a worsening for the next few years in particular? Is the > economic downturn really having that much of an effect on the longevity > numbers? (I'm not saying it's not true; I just haven't seen evidence for it > and would be (un)happy to be directed to it.) > > Sorry, to me that was obvious. There's no 'evidence' as it hasn't happened yet, but that's what happened in previous recessions in the US. Quote: Dr. Harvey Brenner, a public health and behavioral sciences professor at the University of North Texas Health Science Center, shared the correlation among mortality, unemployment and reduced spending on health care with members of the D-FW Health Industry Council at a luncheon Wednesday in Las Colinas. Brenner said socioeconomic status is the largest determinant of health and mortality. "It's not an act of God, it's an act of the unemployment rate," Brenner said. In recessions in the early 1970s and 1980s, Brenner was commissioned to do studies linking the economy and mortality rates for Congress. He's also researched the topic for the executive branch of the European Union. Brenner said he won't know the current recession's impact on death rates for at least two years after it's over. However, by using multivariable regression models measuring Americans' increased fat, carbohydrate and tobacco consumption rates, Brenner has early indicators that this recession may cut deeper than previous ones. "In the past, we saw people die within 10 years after their job loss," Brenner said. "Now we're seeing them die as early as the same year." End quote. -------------------------- It's not an instant effect as it takes time for people to get sick, then find that they can't afford medical bills. In the US when you become unemployed you often lose your company health insurance as well. This doesn't happen in countries with a national health service. Health care and medical care are both included in NHS schemes. For example, people can visit their local doctor for advice on things like healthy eating or help to stop smoking, etc. It's not compulsory, of course. You can't make people stop smoking, though high tax helps. ;) Life styles are definitely important. Being poor is often associated with a lack of 'smarts' and / or education, and they may just not realise the self-inflicted damage they are doing to themselves. I don't think I'm disagreeing with much that you wrote, just looking at from another angle. And being more pessimistic, as is my wont. :) BillK From max at maxmore.com Fri Aug 21 16:45:20 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 11:45:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Life expectancy reaches all-time high in U.S. Message-ID: <200908211645.n7LGjSHI023964@andromeda.ziaspace.com> BillK wrote: >It's not an instant effect as it takes time for people to get sick, >then find that they can't afford medical bills. In the US when you >become unemployed you often lose your company health insurance as >well. This doesn't happen in countries with a national health service. Agreed. I also agree that tying health insurance to employment has bad effects. That's largely a result of regulatory and tax policies. In a health care system that was more market-based, health insurance would be follow the individual far more than today. That is a major concern of market-friendly health care reformers. >"In the past, we saw people die within 10 years after their job >loss," Brenner said. "Now we're seeing them die as early as the same >year." End quote. Okay, but that doesn't seem "obvious" to me. I don't see why there should be such a drastic change from previous recessions. The length of unemployment (so far) doesn't appear to be so much greater as to make this effect obvious. What I do agree is obvious, is the general correlation between GDP and health. Max From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Sat Aug 22 03:56:19 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] but isn't Japan a gerontocracy? Message-ID: <842081.10667.qm@web59912.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Journals today are fluffy as marshmallows. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Aug 22 11:07:34 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 13:07:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: The Paradox of the Posthuman... In-Reply-To: <4620.203.221.30.3.1250812973.squirrel@webmail.unimelb.edu.au> References: <4620.203.221.30.3.1250812973.squirrel@webmail.unimelb.edu.au> Message-ID: <580930c20908220407o27402253u91c0ee56126bbf87@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Julie Joy Clarke Date: 2009/8/21 Subject: Re: The Paradox of the Posthuman... To: stefano.vaj at gmail.com Hi Stefano, >Thank you for reading my book & for beginning a conversation on your website. >You may be interested in dipping into my blog and posting comments. It's called 'Anything But Human' >http://juliejoyclarke.blogspot.com >Cheers, Julie -- Dr Julie Clarke Honorary Fellow in Screen Studies School of Culture and Communications The University of Melbourne Telephone:(Landline)93294546 (Mob) 0400164754 http://juliejoyclarke.blogspot.com http://julieclarke1951.spaces.live.com -- Stefano Vaj From hal at finney.org Sat Aug 22 19:42:08 2009 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 12:42:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] HF health news Message-ID: <20090822194208.BEEA514F6E1@finney.org> Hello friends - I haven't posted on this list for a long time, but I still subscribe and I have known some of you, virtually or in person, for many years. I wanted to post this here as I think this is a group which will understand some of what I am experiencing. Because of the sensitivity of the topic, I am trying to manage the order in which I tell the various groups I am involved with. Please refrain from posting this information elsewhere, so that other friends and associates don't learn the news too indirectly. Two weeks ago I was unexpectedly diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. ALS, also called Lou Gehrig's disease in the U.S., is a progressive neuromuscular disorder leading to inability to move, eat, or breathe. At present there is no cure or even effective treatment. Average survival times are 2-5 years after diagnosis. My case is somewhat unusual in that my diagnosis came very quickly, while my symptoms are mild. I first noticed hoarseness and slowing in my speech about 4 months ago. Doctors also found some slight hand weakness. The diagnosis is primarily based on electromyograms, studies which look at the electrical characteristics of impulses in my muscle fibers. Mine show signs of nerve deterioration and death, with progression typical of ALS. Doctors cannot give me a specific prognosis. Due to the early diagnosis and the apparent lack of significant change over the past 4 months, I can hope for a longer than usual survival. OTOH, ALS which begins in the mouth and throat area, what they call "bulbar" onset, often allows for a shorter survival time, compared to limb onset. The good news is that ALS generally has little or no impact on higher brain functions. Although patients cannot move or speak, they can still think clearly. This may not sound ideal, but it works very well for one particular aspect of my situation: I have been signed up with Alcor for cryonic suspension for almost 20 years now. Cryonic suspension is of course a gamble at best, but on top of the odds against it working under ideal conditions, we all face the risks of death due to various events which would make suspension difficult or impossible. Furthermore, many people today who do manage to "die in bed" will have suffered significant mental deterioration by the time of death. In my case, I now have a pretty clear picture of the likely course of my final years. I can have a strong expectation of dying with my mental facilities largely or even fully intact. Further, the time of my passing will probably become clear somewhat in advance. All this should allow me to experience the highest quality suspension that current technology allows. Of course I wish the news were better, and in fact all hope is not lost that I could still have many years of good health ahead. There is always the chance that the diagnosis is mistaken; the subtlety of my symptoms alone would suggest that my case must lie somewhat in a gray area. While the odds are not good, 10% of ALS patients survive longer than 10 years. Stephen Hawking, the most famous living ALS patient, has lived more than 40 years since his diagnosis (some experts think he must not have ALS, just because he's lived so long; but if so, what he has differs from ALS only in that it lets you live for a long time). Despite these hopes, I need to face the reality that the likelihood is that I have a relatively short time ahead. I am still coming to grips with the situation. I hope the cryonics, or something else, works; I would like to see the future, see all the many things that will happen over the years ahead, perhaps even be reunited with my wife and family. While I did not expect to benefit from my cryonics arrangements for some decades yet, it is reassuring to know that there is a chance of continued survival even given this terminal diagnosis. I think this will be even more comforting as the time of my end approaches. I imagine that closing my eyes for the final time will be easier, knowing that there is a chance, even a small one, that I will be opening them again in a new, and perhaps better, world. I feel worst about leaving family and friends. Some of you know my wife, Fran; it seems in many ways to be harder for her, the one who will be left behind, than for me. Studies of ALS patients have found that the quality of life is often worse for caregivers than the "PALS" (People with ALS) themselves. Hopefully we can both find the strength to help each other get through the challenging years ahead. I'm sorry to be bringing bad news, but I can't say much about my cryonics arrangements with most other people and groups I know. It's nice to have a forum where the idea is not considered too bizarre. And perhaps this will be a reminder to others who might be putting off signing up, that we never know the course of the future and that getting some insurance in advance can be a tremendous source of comfort when you need it. Hal Finney From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Aug 22 21:51:55 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:51:55 +0200 Subject: [ExI] HF health news In-Reply-To: <20090822194208.BEEA514F6E1@finney.org> References: <20090822194208.BEEA514F6E1@finney.org> Message-ID: <580930c20908221451q59cc3a21vbcdb07fd0fe53f7e@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/22 Hal Finney : > I haven't posted on this list for a long time, but I still subscribe > and I have known some of you, virtually or in person, for many years. I > wanted to post this here as I think this is a group which will understand > some of what I am experiencing. I think this is a very sobering and dignified message. While I wish Hal all the best, and cryonics surely allows for hope even beyond all hope, all of a sudden the "cool" and "responsible" philosophical concerns about the risks that technological developments might lead to one's being chased down the street by a Big Bad AI sound definitely less compelling in comparison to actual threats to actual people. -- Stefano Vaj From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Aug 23 05:35:33 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 00:35:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] HF health news In-Reply-To: <20090822194208.BEEA514F6E1@finney.org> References: <20090822194208.BEEA514F6E1@finney.org> Message-ID: <96CA3FBFE146424C97BD6D7B8C527F37@DFC68LF1> Hi Hal, Thank you for including us in your current health situation. It is fortunate that you caught this early and even though your outlook is both pragmatic and humble, there still is hope that there could be a means to forestall the effects of ALS. We are and always will be here for you. Warmest thoughts and love, Natasha Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of "Hal Finney" Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 2:42 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [ExI] HF health news Hello friends - I haven't posted on this list for a long time, but I still subscribe and I have known some of you, virtually or in person, for many years. I wanted to post this here as I think this is a group which will understand some of what I am experiencing. Because of the sensitivity of the topic, I am trying to manage the order in which I tell the various groups I am involved with. Please refrain from posting this information elsewhere, so that other friends and associates don't learn the news too indirectly. Two weeks ago I was unexpectedly diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. ALS, also called Lou Gehrig's disease in the U.S., is a progressive neuromuscular disorder leading to inability to move, eat, or breathe. At present there is no cure or even effective treatment. Average survival times are 2-5 years after diagnosis. My case is somewhat unusual in that my diagnosis came very quickly, while my symptoms are mild. I first noticed hoarseness and slowing in my speech about 4 months ago. Doctors also found some slight hand weakness. The diagnosis is primarily based on electromyograms, studies which look at the electrical characteristics of impulses in my muscle fibers. Mine show signs of nerve deterioration and death, with progression typical of ALS. Doctors cannot give me a specific prognosis. Due to the early diagnosis and the apparent lack of significant change over the past 4 months, I can hope for a longer than usual survival. OTOH, ALS which begins in the mouth and throat area, what they call "bulbar" onset, often allows for a shorter survival time, compared to limb onset. The good news is that ALS generally has little or no impact on higher brain functions. Although patients cannot move or speak, they can still think clearly. This may not sound ideal, but it works very well for one particular aspect of my situation: I have been signed up with Alcor for cryonic suspension for almost 20 years now. Cryonic suspension is of course a gamble at best, but on top of the odds against it working under ideal conditions, we all face the risks of death due to various events which would make suspension difficult or impossible. Furthermore, many people today who do manage to "die in bed" will have suffered significant mental deterioration by the time of death. In my case, I now have a pretty clear picture of the likely course of my final years. I can have a strong expectation of dying with my mental facilities largely or even fully intact. Further, the time of my passing will probably become clear somewhat in advance. All this should allow me to experience the highest quality suspension that current technology allows. Of course I wish the news were better, and in fact all hope is not lost that I could still have many years of good health ahead. There is always the chance that the diagnosis is mistaken; the subtlety of my symptoms alone would suggest that my case must lie somewhat in a gray area. While the odds are not good, 10% of ALS patients survive longer than 10 years. Stephen Hawking, the most famous living ALS patient, has lived more than 40 years since his diagnosis (some experts think he must not have ALS, just because he's lived so long; but if so, what he has differs from ALS only in that it lets you live for a long time). Despite these hopes, I need to face the reality that the likelihood is that I have a relatively short time ahead. I am still coming to grips with the situation. I hope the cryonics, or something else, works; I would like to see the future, see all the many things that will happen over the years ahead, perhaps even be reunited with my wife and family. While I did not expect to benefit from my cryonics arrangements for some decades yet, it is reassuring to know that there is a chance of continued survival even given this terminal diagnosis. I think this will be even more comforting as the time of my end approaches. I imagine that closing my eyes for the final time will be easier, knowing that there is a chance, even a small one, that I will be opening them again in a new, and perhaps better, world. I feel worst about leaving family and friends. Some of you know my wife, Fran; it seems in many ways to be harder for her, the one who will be left behind, than for me. Studies of ALS patients have found that the quality of life is often worse for caregivers than the "PALS" (People with ALS) themselves. Hopefully we can both find the strength to help each other get through the challenging years ahead. I'm sorry to be bringing bad news, but I can't say much about my cryonics arrangements with most other people and groups I know. It's nice to have a forum where the idea is not considered too bizarre. And perhaps this will be a reminder to others who might be putting off signing up, that we never know the course of the future and that getting some insurance in advance can be a tremendous source of comfort when you need it. Hal Finney _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From max at maxmore.com Sun Aug 23 17:30:26 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:30:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] More obesity, longer life spans Message-ID: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> BillK responded to a previous post of mine, suggesting that the gains in U.S. longevity are likely to reverse, starting right now, in part because of the economic downturn but also due to increased obesity. On the latter point, here's an interesting piece and comments: Something is wrong with the model http://luysii.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/something-is-wrong-with-the-model/ More comments here: http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/08/something_is_wrong_with_the_mo.php ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From aiguy at comcast.net Sun Aug 23 18:32:58 2009 From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:32:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] More obesity, longer life spans In-Reply-To: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4FBA739CB2AC410EAD320F24AA301506@ZandraQuad> The following monographs suggest that the reduction of transfats in fast food and grocery store products may soon have a very positive role in reducing heart disease. It is probably true in the past that people who were obese consumed a lot more transfat than other in the population which probably increased their risk factor of being overweight even more. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118499185/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 http://www.healpain.net/articles/Killer%20in%20GS.html http://www.healpain.net/articles/No1Killer.html From pharos at gmail.com Sun Aug 23 18:55:00 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:55:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] More obesity, longer life spans In-Reply-To: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/23/09, Max More wrote: > BillK responded to a previous post of mine, suggesting that the gains in > U.S. longevity are likely to reverse, starting right now, in part because of > the economic downturn but also due to increased obesity. On the latter > point, here's an interesting piece and comments: > > Something is wrong with the model > http://luysii.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/something-is-wrong-with-the-model/ > > More comments here: > http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/08/something_is_wrong_with_the_mo.php > Lots of interesting comments there. I think he's misunderstood the model. The causes of death are multi-factorial. Being obese is just one factor. You don't have to be obese to die. Many skinny people die from other causes. Where studies have been done on populations, trying to exclude all other factors except obesity, the conclusion is that being obese shortens your life. If obesity is increasing then life expectancy should be reducing, but other factors like reduced infant deaths, drugs to control vascular disease, anti-smoking campaigns, seat belts, etc, etc. will be improving life expectancy and overwhelm the obesity effect. The reason I expect a drop in US life expectancy in the next few years is the loss of health insurance cover due to unemployment and an increase in the number of people who cannot afford the drugs they require. BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Aug 23 20:39:40 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:39:40 +0200 Subject: [ExI] More obesity, longer life spans In-Reply-To: References: <200908231730.n7NHUcZq012725@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908231339x5f11fb2do6eb9d0ddabde70d0@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/23 BillK : > Where studies have been done on populations, trying to exclude all > other factors except obesity, the conclusion is that being obese > shortens your life. > That would seem rather obvious. If anything, you are less agile in avoiding collisions with hard and possibly letal objects, aren't you? ;-) -- Stefano Vaj From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Aug 25 02:32:28 2009 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:32:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] RSS feeds Message-ID: <55ad6af70908241932j63889e7bs26e24409d1492824@mail.gmail.com> Hey all, Back in 2007 I threw up a page on one of my servers detailing what RSS feeds I subscribed to: http://heybryan.org/bookmarks/2007-10-30-feeds.html opml: http://heybryan.org/bookmarks/2007-12-20.opml But now I think it's about time for an update. I would also like to (privately) hear recommendations for feeds to be reading that I may have missed from my latest collection. http://heybryan.org/~bbishop/docs/rss/ In particular there are some interesting subdirectories like for journals (arxiv, institute of physics, public library of science, ieee, all sciencedirect journals with feeds, etc). Also, that entire directory is a git repository, so feel free to clone it. I'll be updating it with the recommendations I get back from the community. Thanks, - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 From max at maxmore.com Tue Aug 25 17:07:48 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:07:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A price-to-store approach to nuclear waste Message-ID: <200908251707.n7PH7tiR000362@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Those of us interested in seeing a greater use of nuclear power will be interested in this piece. My commentary/review: Overcoming Nuclear Power's Biggest Hurdle http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.aspx?coid=CO8220918215077 ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 26 01:12:28 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:12:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] more flagrant self-promo Message-ID: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> Hope nobody will be offended if I post a link to my latest pop-critical book, just out from Borgo Press: Unleashing the Strange: Twenty-First Century Science Fiction Literature Damien Broderick From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 05:49:07 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:49:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] more flagrant self-promo In-Reply-To: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com> I was amazed such a subject could be covered in under 300 pages. I look forward to reading it and it's now in my Amazon wanted list I wish you would be in a Cosmos style series on science and/or science fiction. John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 26 06:07:56 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:07:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] more flagrant self-promo In-Reply-To: <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> On 8/26/2009 12:49 AM, John Grigg wrote: > I was amazed such a subject could be covered in under 300 pages. Well, it's not mean to be encyclopedic, quite the contrary. The center of the book is a "case of samples" where I provide brief readings of a range of books brilliant, good, okay and a few ugly. I do offer a hypothesis or organizing device of Waves (with the radical "new wave" of the 1960s in the middle of the genre's development to date). And I even talk a bit about my own sf history and approach to writing and reading the stuff. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Aug 26 06:16:36 2009 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:16:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] more flagrant self-promo In-Reply-To: <4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com> <4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> On 8/26/2009 1:07 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Well, it's not mean to be encyclopedic Actually, it *can* be mean if used for bullying purposes. :) But in this case, what it wasn't was *meant*. It's late. Damien Broderick From nanogirl at halcyon.com Wed Aug 26 06:20:50 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:20:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> <4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a semi finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to be registered at youtube (which is free) http://www.youtube.com/create_account then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - (to make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this page to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue tabs, click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I am wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It is a video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you will see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are allowed to vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However you are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. But please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every vote counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize indeed. Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank you, thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 06:29:19 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:29:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The trailer for James Cameron's "Avatar." Message-ID: <2d6187670908252329l7e15859ar7d308d9e77dbc663@mail.gmail.com> I greatly admire the films of James Cameron and very excitedly look forward to _Avatar_. It was a thrill for me to watch the trailer... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/ John : ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 10:58:41 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:58:41 +0200 Subject: [ExI] more flagrant self-promo In-Reply-To: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908260358t3982097dp1597a5517b6322eb@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/26 Damien Broderick : > Hope nobody will be offended if I post a link to my latest pop-critical > book, just out from Borgo Press: > > Unleashing the Strange: Twenty-First Century Science Fiction Literature > > Thank you for the notice. Duly purchased. :-) -- Stefano Vaj From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Aug 26 15:59:49 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:59:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Done! (Nice work Gina.) Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina Miller Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a semi finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to be registered at youtube (which is free) http://www.youtube.com/create_account then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - (to make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this page to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue tabs, click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I am wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It is a video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you will see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are allowed to vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However you are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. But please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every vote counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize indeed. Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank you, thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From max at maxmore.com Wed Aug 26 16:53:46 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:53:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now Message-ID: <200908261653.n7QGrss0029271@andromeda.ziaspace.com> I recommend Bailey's article in full... Markets, Not Mandates http://www.reason.com/news/show/135081.html ...but I especially wanted to quote two paragraphs and the included links to useful resources for improving your health care (if you live in the USA), without having to wait for reforms: >Competition would also transform the medical information market, >making it radically transparent. >In fact, baby steps toward transparency have already begun. Angie's List >now allows consumers to submit reports about their experiences with >physicians. Sources of information for medical comparison shopping >would proliferate, just as there are now dozens of publications >devoted to comparing the features and prices of cars, computers, >guns, and vacations. A core of savvy shoppers in the medical market >will mean better price and quality comparisons for everyone. > >Wondering what shopping in a competitive medical market might be >like? Check out the admittedly clunky California government's common >surgeries and cost comparison website. >Browsing reveals that the cost for heart valve replacement varies >from $72,000 to $368,000, and the cost for angioplasty varies from >$9,000 to $204,000. Other websites, such New Choice Health, http://www.newchoicehealth.com/Home> >enable consumers to go shopping for relatively routine procedures >like colonoscopies, laparoscopic hernia repair, and MRI scans. >Prices for colonoscopies in Washington, DC, for instance, vary from >$580 to $1,386, hernia repair from $974 to $2,519, and abdominal >MRIs from $936 to $1,960. ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 17:47:15 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:47:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now In-Reply-To: <200908261653.n7QGrss0029271@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908261653.n7QGrss0029271@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/26/09, Max More wrote: > I recommend Bailey's article in full... > Markets, Not Mandates > http://www.reason.com/news/show/135081.html > > ...but I especially wanted to quote two paragraphs and the included links > to useful resources for improving your health care (if you live in the USA), > without having to wait for reforms: > > Competition would also transform the medical information market, making it > > radically transparent. > In the US you've got health care all back-to-front. Probably because of the gung-ho 'We can fix it' outlook. By the time it needs fixing, it's too late and too expensive. The US needs a new lifestyle system. More exercise and healthy eating and less stress and pollution would add ten years to life expectancy. BillK From max at maxmore.com Wed Aug 26 18:00:11 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:00:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now Message-ID: <200908261800.n7QI0I4P027985@andromeda.ziaspace.com> BillK wrote: >In the US you've got health care all back-to-front. >Probably because of the gung-ho 'We can fix it' outlook. I'm really puzzled by this statement. Does that mean we would be better of with an attitude of "Oh, fuck it. Let's not bother trying to improve it."? If you think the particular ways that the USA's so far tried to fix the problem have been bad attempts, I agree. But that's not what you seem to be saying. >By the time it needs fixing, it's too late and too expensive. > >The US needs a new lifestyle system. >More exercise and healthy eating and less stress and pollution would >add ten years to life expectancy. Yes, of course. But why does that mean we shouldn't *also* work (intelligently) on improving the health care system? > Without having looked at the book itself, the description makes me wonder. It appears to be another in a long line of books (not just about health -- this is endemic with business success books) that look for examples that support a pre-existing hypothesis, cherry-picking the data -- rather than checking carefully for disconfirming examples. I'm not saying the book is wrong (I can't say that without seeing what's inside), but the description is not especially encouraging in this regard. That said, yes yes yes, more people should be doing more exercise and eating better (and less), and taking other personally-controllable measures to improve their health. Max From nanogirl at halcyon.com Wed Aug 26 18:02:15 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:02:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850> Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > Done! (Nice work Gina.) > > > Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina Miller > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) > > I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a > semi > finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to be > registered at youtube (which is free) > http://www.youtube.com/create_account > then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - (to > make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this page > to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue > tabs, > click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I > am > wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the > video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It is > a > video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you will > see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, > thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are allowed > to > vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However > you > are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. > But > please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every > vote > counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current > financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize > indeed. > Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank you, > thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians > always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller > > > Gina "Nanogirl" Miller > Nanotechnology Industries > http://www.nanoindustries.com > Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com > Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: > http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate > http://www.foresight.org > Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com > "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From max at maxmore.com Wed Aug 26 18:59:48 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:59:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Shaping the new Presiden't Council on Bioethics Message-ID: <200908261859.n7QIxsVT016085@andromeda.ziaspace.com> For those disturbed by the work of Business Council, you'll find this interesting: The President's Council on Bioethics, Take Two Can Obama do better than Bush when it comes to biotech freedom? http://www.reason.com/news/show/135639.html ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From pharos at gmail.com Wed Aug 26 22:14:35 2009 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:14:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now In-Reply-To: <200908261800.n7QI0I4P027985@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908261800.n7QI0I4P027985@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: On 8/26/09, Max More wrote: > I'm really puzzled by this statement. Does that mean we would be better of > with an attitude of "Oh, fuck it. Let's not bother trying to improve it."? > If you think the particular ways that the USA's so far tried to fix the > problem have been bad attempts, I agree. But that's not what you seem to be > saying. > What I intended was to point out was that preventive medicine and health advice would produce a huge improvement in life expectancy for very little cost. (As compared with rearranging the financing of major medical interventions). But there is no drama or excitement in this option. You won't get a tv series with House looking solemn at the patient's bedside and saying, "I'm sorry to break this to you, but you've got to eat more salad". > > Yes, of course. But why does that mean we shouldn't *also* work > (intelligently) on improving the health care system? > In an ideal world, yes, do both. But one option is virtually free with huge benefits and the other option costs over a trillion dollars with debatable benefits. Again, I don't think we're disagreeing very much. BillK From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Thu Aug 27 01:17:41 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now In-Reply-To: <200908261800.n7QI0I4P027985@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <663337.89472.qm@web59910.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Stress? sure, there is no civilization. America is like ancient Rome.. wealthy, powerful, but no virtue. Dysfunctional families. High crime. K-16 Schools that teach students not to think. This country is still fighting not only Vietnam, but also the Civil War; and after 144 years. Stress. you betcha. > More exercise and healthy eating and less stress and pollution would add ten years to life expectancy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Thu Aug 27 01:19:04 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now Message-ID: <551972.39466.qm@web59909.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ?the cost for angioplasty varies from $9,000 to $204,000? Quite a spread-- $195,000. I recommend Bailey's article in full... Markets, Not Mandates http://www.reason.com/news/show/135081.html ...but I especially wanted to quote two paragraphs and the included links to useful resources for improving your health care (if you live in the USA), without having to wait for reforms: > Competition would also transform the medical information market, making it radically transparent. > In fact, baby steps toward transparency have already begun. Angie's List > now allows consumers to submit reports about their experiences with physicians. Sources of information for medical comparison shopping would proliferate, just as there are now dozens of publications devoted to comparing the features and prices of cars, computers, guns, and vacations. A core of savvy shoppers in the medical market will mean better price and quality comparisons for everyone. > > Wondering what shopping in a competitive medical market might be like? Check out the admittedly clunky California government's common surgeries and cost comparison website. > Browsing reveals that the cost for heart valve replacement varies from $72,000 to $368,000, and the cost for angioplasty varies from $9,000 to $204,000. Other websites, such New Choice Health, http://www.newchoicehealth.com/Home> > enable consumers to go shopping for relatively routine procedures like colonoscopies, laparoscopic hernia repair, and MRI scans. Prices for colonoscopies in Washington, DC, for instance, vary from $580 to $1,386, hernia repair from $974 to $2,519, and abdominal MRIs from $936 to $1,960. ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Thu Aug 27 03:19:55 2009 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:19:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now Message-ID: <200908270320.n7R3K6RR026701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> BillK wrote: >In an ideal world, yes, do both. >But one option is virtually free with huge benefits and the other >option costs over a trillion dollars with debatable benefits. Over a trillion dollars? Yes, but only if you're talking about the highly interventionist approach to reform. A market-based reform would cost less than nothing, in total. It would cost some billions to issue vouchers for private medical insurance for the poor, but that could be more than paid for by eliminating Medicaid. The cost for Medicaid in 2005 was $316 billion, and it covered 17 million households. That's about $18,500 per household per year. That's about 50% more than the cost of an annual premium for family coverage -- even at current rates, before improved competition lowers them. Eliminating agricultural subsidies would both save a lot of money and possibly allow the price of unhealthy foods to rise, encouraging a shift to healthier eating. Max ------------------------------------- Max More, Ph.D. Strategic Philosopher Extropy Institute Founder www.maxmore.com max at maxmore.com ------------------------------------- From eschatoon at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 04:48:23 2009 From: eschatoon at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco (2nd email)) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:48:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com> <4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> <4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1fa8c3b90908262148u4166edfcs7b6d68b1027420e4@mail.gmail.com> Done! On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Gina Miller wrote: > I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a semi > finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to be > registered at youtube (which is free) http://www.youtube.com/create_account > then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - (to > make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this page > to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue tabs, > click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I am > wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the > video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It is a > video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you will > see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, > thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are allowed to > vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However you > are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. But > please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every vote > counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current > financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize indeed. > Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank you, > thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians > always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller > > > Gina "Nanogirl" Miller > Nanotechnology Industries > http://www.nanoindustries.com > Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com > Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ > Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ > Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org > Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com > "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- Giulio Prisco http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco aka Eschatoon Magic http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon From nanogirl at halcyon.com Thu Aug 27 06:06:28 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:06:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <1fa8c3b90908262148u4166edfcs7b6d68b1027420e4@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com><2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com> <4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <1fa8c3b90908262148u4166edfcs7b6d68b1027420e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thank you so much Giulio for voting for me! It is very generous of you. Gina www.nanogirl.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Giulio Prisco (2nd email)" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 9:48 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > Done! > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Gina Miller wrote: >> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a >> semi >> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to be >> registered at youtube (which is free) >> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >> then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - >> (to >> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >> page >> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >> tabs, >> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I >> am >> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the >> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It >> is a >> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you will >> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, >> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are allowed >> to >> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However >> you >> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. >> But >> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every >> vote >> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >> indeed. >> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank you, >> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians >> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >> >> >> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >> Nanotechnology Industries >> http://www.nanoindustries.com >> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ >> Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ >> Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org >> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > > -- > Giulio Prisco > http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco > aka Eschatoon Magic > http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From moulton at moulton.com Thu Aug 27 06:12:55 2009 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:12:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Genescient Message-ID: <1251353575.3712.207.camel@desktop-linux> I expect that many of you have heard that Greg Benford and several others were involved in a biotech startup. They gave an early peek at the Convergence conference in Nov 2008. Now it looks like they have their website up: http://www.genescient.com/ Fred From estropico at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 07:39:08 2009 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:39:08 +0100 Subject: [ExI] ExtroBritannia: Quantum Computers and the creation of human-level artificial intelligence - Uploading Schrodinger's Cat?! Message-ID: <4eaaa0d90908270039n6f844ba8i251cfa22801df85d@mail.gmail.com> This talk will put forward a case that quantum computers might help those who wish to achieve the goal of whole-brain emulation and exotic neural networks, and will review how this may provide insight into the currently hotly-debated topic of the role played by quantum mechanics in the brain and consciousness. 2pm-4pm, Saturday 12th September. Speaker: Dr Suzanne Gildert, Research Fellow at University of Birmingham, UK Room CL 101, Clore Management Centre, Birkbeck College, Torrington Square, London WC1E 7HX The talk in more detail This talk will explain the fundamental concepts of the quantum computer (QC) and how these systems might be able to perform certain tasks that classical computers find incredibly difficult. The talk will also explain why QCs might be useful for some very interesting problems with applications to a wide variety of fields such as biology, microprocessor design, pharmaceuticals, economics, transport, chemistry and business. More importantly, the talk will also explain what they can't do! Quantum computers are sometimes wrongly portayed by the media as being replacements for desktop machines, whereas the reality is that they are more like fast co-processors. There will be a review of some of the experimental challenges involved in building QCs, and a focus on a particularly promising version known as the Superconducting Flux-based Quantum Computer. The devices involved in this type of QC are defined using a process similar to semiconductor technology, but using Niobium and Aluminium rather than Silicon. There will be a brief overview of the physics which causes these devices to demonstrate 'Macroscopic Quantum Coherence'- an effect which allows us to scale up quantum effects to a size where we can manipulate them easily, and why the devices must be cooled to millikelvin temperatures for them to work properly. Finally, the talk will look at several 'controversial' applications which may arise as Quantum Computing (and classical High Performance Computing) begins to cross into the field of neuroscience and neural networks. About the speaker Dr Suzanne Gildert is a Research Fellow and Experimental Physicist at the University of Birrmingham. She is currently working on the design and testing of novel superconducting devices (specifically Josephson Junctions) using non-conventional materials and processing techniques. Her physics webpage. There is no charge to attend and everyone is welcome. General discussion is likely to continue after the event, in a nearby pub, for those who are able to stay. Why not join some of the Extrobritannia regulars for a drink and/or light lunch beforehand, any time after 12.30pm, in The Marlborough Arms, 36 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HJ. To find us, look out for a table where there's a copy of the book displayed, "A Shortcut Through Time: The Path to the Quantum Computer". About the venue: Room CL 101 is on the first floor of the Clore Management Centre, which is on the opposite side of Torrington Square from the main Birkbeck College building. Torrington Square is a pedestrian-only square and is about 10 minutes walk from either Russell Square or Goodge St tube stations. http://extrobritannia.blogspot.com/ http://www.transhumanist.org.uk/ From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Thu Aug 27 12:18:24 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:18:24 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Shaping the new Presiden't Council on Bioethics In-Reply-To: <200908261859.n7QIxsVT016085@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <200908261859.n7QIxsVT016085@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908270518m348d324dvab6a685d10900b90@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/26 Max More : > For those disturbed by the work of Business Council, you'll find this > interesting: > > The President's Council on Bioethics, Take Two > Can Obama do better than Bush when it comes to biotech freedom? > http://www.reason.com/news/show/135639.html Very interesting reading. It remains however the case that "democracy" as in "collective self-determination" works for prohibitionism only as long as consensus can be maintained as to the prohibition concerned. The real issue with "progressive bioconservative" is that they want, insist, and preach, that the democratic consensus be oriented towards prohibition, e.g, of reproductive cloning or PDG for the individuals interested in adopting it. The fact that they care less for the individual freedom than they might does not reflect at all in the idea, e.g., that a majority could choose to implement regulation making PDG a routine, non-optional step for all IVF procedures administered by authorised institution in the relevant country. This would be equally limiting, in some sense, for individual freedom in view of a democratic oversight of "what is best" for the parties more directly concerned, but at the same time would have an inverted sign. -- Stefano Vaj From brent.allsop at canonizer.com Thu Aug 27 12:37:55 2009 From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:37:55 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: <4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com> Hi Gina, I didn't see any way to see scores, or how each video was doing. Is this info available? I'll try to remember to vote each day till Sunday, as the rules allow. Wish I would have voted yesterday. Brent Gina Miller wrote: > Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) > Gina > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" > > To: "'ExI chat list'" > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > > >> Done! (Nice work Gina.) >> >> >> Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina Miller >> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM >> To: ExI chat list >> Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) >> >> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as >> a semi >> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need >> to be >> registered at youtube (which is free) >> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >> then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp >> - (to >> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >> page >> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >> tabs, >> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among >> others. I am >> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the >> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. >> It is a >> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you >> will >> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, >> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are >> allowed to >> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. >> However you >> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the >> rules. But >> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as >> every vote >> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >> indeed. >> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank >> you, >> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians >> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >> >> >> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >> Nanotechnology Industries >> http://www.nanoindustries.com >> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: >> http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate >> http://www.foresight.org >> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Aug 27 16:04:09 2009 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:04:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Genescient In-Reply-To: <1251353575.3712.207.camel@desktop-linux> References: <1251353575.3712.207.camel@desktop-linux> Message-ID: <59AD5F8BD4DC422EBE393A47BB4D98AF@DFC68LF1> A clean and elegant website. Thanks for sending the link. Bty, I was surprised not to see Michael Rose involved. Natasha Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Fred C. Moulton Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 1:13 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [ExI] Genescient I expect that many of you have heard that Greg Benford and several others were involved in a biotech startup. They gave an early peek at the Convergence conference in Nov 2008. Now it looks like they have their website up: http://www.genescient.com/ Fred _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From nanogirl at halcyon.com Thu Aug 27 19:42:03 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:42:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] test In-Reply-To: <1251353575.3712.207.camel@desktop-linux> References: <1251353575.3712.207.camel@desktop-linux> Message-ID: <83D005F0A8FE48278B9EB62CDD08DE9D@3DBOXXW4850> From nanogirl at halcyon.com Thu Aug 27 22:33:05 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:33:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850> <4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com> Message-ID: <0962C87C187F48ED89AF3305E9F5C49B@3DBOXXW4850> Brent, no I don't see a way to view the current status either! Do you want me to put a reminder up here everyday? If so I can do that... I want to thank you for taking the time out to support me. Yours, Gina www.nanogirl.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brent Allsop" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:37 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > > Hi Gina, > > I didn't see any way to see scores, or how each video was doing. Is this > info available? > > I'll try to remember to vote each day till Sunday, as the rules allow. > Wish I would have voted yesterday. > > Brent > > > Gina Miller wrote: >> Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) >> Gina >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" >> >> To: "'ExI chat list'" >> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >> >> >>> Done! (Nice work Gina.) >>> >>> >>> Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina Miller >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM >>> To: ExI chat list >>> Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) >>> >>> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a >>> semi >>> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to >>> be >>> registered at youtube (which is free) >>> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >>> then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - >>> (to >>> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >>> page >>> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >>> tabs, >>> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. I >>> am >>> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, the >>> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It >>> is a >>> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you >>> will >>> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs down, >>> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are >>> allowed to >>> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. However >>> you >>> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the rules. >>> But >>> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every >>> vote >>> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >>> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >>> indeed. >>> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank >>> you, >>> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians >>> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>> >>> >>> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>> Nanotechnology Industries >>> http://www.nanoindustries.com >>> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >>> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: >>> http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate >>> http://www.foresight.org >>> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >>> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Fri Aug 28 01:58:42 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:58:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] what is the world coming to? Message-ID: <857474.64140.qm@web59906.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ?'Moon rock' in Dutch national museum is just petrified wood -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lcorbin at rawbw.com Fri Aug 28 05:16:50 2009 From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:16:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress In-Reply-To: <663337.89472.qm@web59910.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <663337.89472.qm@web59910.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4A976842.4090803@rawbw.com> In "Re: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now" Post Futurist wrote: > Stress? sure, there is no civilization. Come now, don't be silly. > America is like ancient Rome.. wealthy, powerful, but no virtue. *No* virtue? Again, you exaggerate wildly. And it's evident that you know very little about ancient Rome. Whatever corruption, mal-distribution of power and influence, disregard for individual rights that we suffer in the modern world, multiply by 10 or 100 to get ancient Rome or Greece. And as for brutality or intimidation by force, there is utterly no comparison. > Dysfunctional families. High crime. As compared to what, when? Of course, it varies a lot from neighborhood to neighborhood and city to city in the West (or in America, as you write), and I'll have to let others speak for their neighborhoods and cities. Yes, there are more dysfunctional families in America than in 1950. Most adults in the slums were married back then, and relatively few children were born out of wedlock. But "dysfunctional" in terms of intra- family tension, alcoholism, and so forth, sadly the situation has never been ideal. And that's the eternal problem in the babblesphere and among the chattering classes: invariably the comparison is made to an ideal, rather than to anything real (past or present). > K-16 Schools that teach students not to think. As compared to when? Besides, to me it's not clear at all that you can "teach someone to think". Yes, some constructivism in education has been all to the good, but some of it is very bad. I would guess that most schools and most home-schoolers are not too far from a happy medium. (I am by no means saying that things can't improve, nor suggesting that anywhere near optimal learning and teaching strategies geared to individuals have yet been found.) > This country is still fighting not only Vietnam, but also the > Civil War; and after 144 years. > Stress. you betcha. Okay, there are still echos of both those conflicts, in both politics and daily life. But compared to 1909, when the country was nearly at war with itself (labor vs. business), politically the country today is quite united. And leaving politics aside, the *real* stresses of daily life for almost everyone have nothing at all to do with those ancient wars or their after-effects. Lee From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Fri Aug 28 05:52:41 2009 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:52:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The trailer for James Cameron's "Avatar." In-Reply-To: <2d6187670908252329l7e15859ar7d308d9e77dbc663@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d6187670908252329l7e15859ar7d308d9e77dbc663@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2d6187670908272252p21b02bf0l5a59081d1c31c1b@mail.gmail.com> > > Viewer feedback about the upcoming film's trailer from G4's "Attack of the > Show" was (to me) surprisingly negative. Perhaps this Cameron flick has > been overhyped and will not be the expected mega hit of the holidays. And > it will of course get compared to the superb District 9. > >> >> >>> John >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nanogirl at halcyon.com Fri Aug 28 18:55:58 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:55:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <0962C87C187F48ED89AF3305E9F5C49B@3DBOXXW4850> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850><4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com> <0962C87C187F48ED89AF3305E9F5C49B@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: Don't forget to vote for my animation again today, thank you my friends - from the bottom of my heart. http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gina Miller" To: Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 3:33 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > Brent, no I don't see a way to view the current status either! Do you want > me to put a reminder up here everyday? If so I can do that... I want to > thank you for taking the time out to support me. Yours, Gina > www.nanogirl.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brent Allsop" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:37 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > > >> >> Hi Gina, >> >> I didn't see any way to see scores, or how each video was doing. Is this >> info available? >> >> I'll try to remember to vote each day till Sunday, as the rules allow. >> Wish I would have voted yesterday. >> >> Brent >> >> >> Gina Miller wrote: >>> Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) >>> Gina >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" >>> >>> To: "'ExI chat list'" >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM >>> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >>> >>> >>>> Done! (Nice work Gina.) >>>> >>>> >>>> Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >>>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina >>>> Miller >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM >>>> To: ExI chat list >>>> Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) >>>> >>>> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a >>>> semi >>>> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to >>>> be >>>> registered at youtube (which is free) >>>> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >>>> then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - >>>> (to >>>> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >>>> page >>>> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >>>> tabs, >>>> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. >>>> I >>>> am >>>> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, >>>> the >>>> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. It >>>> is a >>>> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you >>>> will >>>> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs >>>> down, >>>> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are >>>> allowed to >>>> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. >>>> However >>>> you >>>> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the >>>> rules. >>>> But >>>> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as every >>>> vote >>>> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >>>> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >>>> indeed. >>>> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank >>>> you, >>>> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians >>>> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>>> >>>> >>>> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>>> Nanotechnology Industries >>>> http://www.nanoindustries.com >>>> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >>>> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: >>>> http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate >>>> http://www.foresight.org >>>> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >>>> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Fri Aug 28 22:14:14 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress Message-ID: <479207.11150.qm@web59916.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> "And leaving politics aside, the *real* stresses of daily life for almost everyone have nothing at all to do with those ancient wars or their after-effects." Nothing at all?? BTW it wasn't a direct linkage--?needless (unless in public schools) to say, conditions are different 1500- 2000 years later. The post wasn't to?even remotely suggest we'll be destroyed as the Roman Empire was; but?when we get to the point that so many are celebrating Michael Jackson and Ted Kennedy as some sort of role models(!), that is quite a stretch. Is it absolutely unreasonable to infer we're devoid of at least conventional morality? Can we say we're just making the rules?up as we go along? I don't know and it is disturbing you?wizards?almost certainly don't have a clue as to today's morality (or lack thereof) and what is to come. The tunes are being played by ear. Schools were?somewhat better?during the '50s and '60s, and probably during the '40s as well. I can't stand to?speak to youths today; the slop teechurs are pouring into their minds. It's not at all encouraging that 100 years?after 1909,?government is still so corrupt. And now such as auto companies can join in for the fun. Correct,?Lee, we're not nearly at war in labor disputes as was the case in 1909; no, instead over a $ trillion, plus hidden costs, we're-- are-- spent on an external?war that will go on for so long?who in their right mind wants to think about it? How much spent on law enforcers, courts, prisons, battered families, costly litigation? and all that jazz... Different from 1909? yes. Better? maybe. I don't know, and it makes me nervous none of you know, either. It is a photo that hasn't been developed yet. ? ? --- On Thu, 8/27/09, Lee Corbin wrote: From: Lee Corbin Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress To: "ExI chat list" Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 11:16 PM In "Re: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now" Post Futurist wrote: > Stress? sure, there is no civilization. Come now, don't be silly. > America is like ancient Rome.. wealthy, powerful, but no virtue. *No* virtue? Again, you exaggerate wildly. And it's evident that you know very little about ancient Rome. Whatever corruption, mal-distribution of power and influence, disregard for individual rights that we suffer in the modern world, multiply by 10 or 100 to get ancient Rome or Greece. And as for brutality or intimidation by force, there is utterly no comparison. > Dysfunctional families. High crime. As compared to what, when? Of course, it varies a lot from neighborhood to neighborhood and city to city in the West (or in America, as you write), and I'll have to let others speak for their neighborhoods and cities. Yes, there are more dysfunctional families in America than in 1950. Most adults in the slums were married back then, and relatively few children were born out of wedlock. But "dysfunctional" in terms of intra- family tension, alcoholism, and so forth, sadly the situation has never been ideal. And that's the eternal problem in the babblesphere and among the chattering classes: invariably the comparison is made to an ideal, rather than to anything real (past or present). > K-16 Schools that teach students not to think. As compared to when? Besides, to me it's not clear at all that you can "teach someone to think". Yes, some constructivism in education has been all to the good, but some of it is very bad. I would guess that most schools and most home-schoolers are not too far from a happy medium. (I am by no means saying that things can't improve, nor suggesting that anywhere near optimal learning and teaching strategies geared to individuals have yet been found.) > This country is still fighting not only Vietnam, but also the Civil War; and after 144 years. > Stress. you betcha. Okay, there are still echos of both those conflicts, in both politics and daily life. But compared to 1909, when the country was nearly at war with itself (labor vs. business), politically the country today is quite united. And leaving politics aside, the *real* stresses of daily life for almost everyone have nothing at all to do with those ancient wars or their after-effects. Lee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Fri Aug 28 22:58:20 2009 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] BBC article on climate change In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Sorry to drag up climate change again, but I'd been reading over the list, carefully thinking hard on climate change for a blog post I was planning. I was going to consider whether the climate change ideas marketed and the solutions presented by campaigning groups and politicians were the best ideas, or just the Al-Gore-media-friendly-marketable truths. Well, the BBC beat me to it with a news website article on it, trailing a radio programme I'll catch up on this weekend. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8223611.stm Tom From moulton at moulton.com Fri Aug 28 23:36:14 2009 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:36:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] BBC article on climate change In-Reply-To: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1251502574.3712.259.camel@desktop-linux> This URL seems to work if the one originally given does not http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8223611.stm On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 15:58 -0700, Tom Nowell wrote: > Sorry to drag up climate change again, but I'd been reading over the list, carefully thinking hard on climate change for a blog post I was planning. I was going to consider whether the climate change ideas marketed and the solutions presented by campaigning groups and politicians were the best ideas, or just the Al-Gore-media-friendly-marketable truths. Well, the BBC beat me to it with a news website article on it, trailing a radio programme I'll catch up on this weekend. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8223611.stm > > Tom > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From jonkc at bellsouth.net Sat Aug 29 16:29:43 2009 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:29:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] BBC article on climate change In-Reply-To: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: From: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8223611.stm > Species are going extinct at perhaps 1,000 times the normal rate That's a really really interesting statistic. It would be even more interesting if I had some reason to believe it's true. My rule of thumb is to be suspicious of any article that uses the word "normal" without further elaboration. > Soils are becoming saline, air quality is a huge cause of illness > and premature death Everyone agrees that bad air is, well, bad; but is it really a HUGE cause of death? If so it's odd that in no place has the the air gotten worse than in China, and yet in no place has the life expectancy increased more. I think that means that some things are worse than bad air, like no food. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Aug 29 19:23:04 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 21:23:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] BBC article on climate change In-Reply-To: References: <307325.40932.qm@web27004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <580930c20908291223jf1bba28y361083763cc92192@mail.gmail.com> 2009/8/29 John Clark : > Species are going extinct at perhaps 1,000 times the normal rate > > That's a really really interesting statistic. It would be even more > interesting if I had some reason to believe it's true. My rule of thumb is > to be suspicious of any article that uses the word "normal" without further > elaboration. "Normal" is a meaningless concept in this context, I fully agree. But even though I do not have sources at hand right now nor time to search them, I am afraid that increasingly fast loss of biodiversity is a fact, probably much less debatably than GW. And, there again, it might well not be (entirely?) anthropic, but remain nevertheless a source of concern. I have no doubt that the mass extinction of the Cambrian, which could not in any sense be anthropic, has been a great loss for our planet, if anything in terms of scientific interest. -- Stefano Vaj From nanogirl at halcyon.com Sat Aug 29 21:10:03 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:10:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850><4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com><0962C87C187F48ED89AF3305E9F5C49B@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: <623729E857AE49E5BCDF4765B2D179DC@3DBOXXW4850> We've got today and tomorrow left to vote for my animation: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html Thank you everyone who is helping! Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gina Miller" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > Don't forget to vote for my animation again today, thank you my friends - > from the bottom of my heart. > http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html > Gina > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gina Miller" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 3:33 PM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > > >> Brent, no I don't see a way to view the current status either! Do you >> want >> me to put a reminder up here everyday? If so I can do that... I want to >> thank you for taking the time out to support me. Yours, Gina >> www.nanogirl.com >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Brent Allsop" >> To: "ExI chat list" >> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:37 AM >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >> >> >>> >>> Hi Gina, >>> >>> I didn't see any way to see scores, or how each video was doing. Is >>> this >>> info available? >>> >>> I'll try to remember to vote each day till Sunday, as the rules allow. >>> Wish I would have voted yesterday. >>> >>> Brent >>> >>> >>> Gina Miller wrote: >>>> Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) >>>> Gina >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" >>>> >>>> To: "'ExI chat list'" >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >>>> >>>> >>>>> Done! (Nice work Gina.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >>>>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina >>>>> Miller >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM >>>>> To: ExI chat list >>>>> Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) >>>>> >>>>> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as a >>>>> semi >>>>> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need to >>>>> be >>>>> registered at youtube (which is free) >>>>> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >>>>> then make sure you are signed in and go to http://www.youtube.com/hp - >>>>> (to >>>>> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >>>>> page >>>>> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >>>>> tabs, >>>>> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among others. >>>>> I >>>>> am >>>>> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, >>>>> the >>>>> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. >>>>> It >>>>> is a >>>>> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you >>>>> will >>>>> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs >>>>> down, >>>>> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are >>>>> allowed to >>>>> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. >>>>> However >>>>> you >>>>> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the >>>>> rules. >>>>> But >>>>> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as >>>>> every >>>>> vote >>>>> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >>>>> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >>>>> indeed. >>>>> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank >>>>> you, >>>>> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow extropians >>>>> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" >>>>> Miller >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>>>> Nanotechnology Industries >>>>> http://www.nanoindustries.com >>>>> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >>>>> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: >>>>> http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate >>>>> http://www.foresight.org >>>>> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >>>>> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From p0stfuturist at yahoo.com Sun Aug 30 02:38:53 2009 From: p0stfuturist at yahoo.com (Post Futurist) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 19:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress Message-ID: <95791.13643.qm@web59904.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Vietnam??so many?thousands of ex-'Nam soldiers are in pain; and who was it Repuglicans ran for?potus less than a year ago? a gung ho 'Nam vet--?over 33 years after the war ended. The Vietnam war is NOT over. And we're also in another war. Thousands of casualties stateside. Constructivism is no longer a threat in schools, now deconstructionists have much more latitude, not that their teaching can be termed 'morally relativistic'; technically there is no longer any morality, only?situational ethics.?Does cause exist for optimism? yes, for 12-16 students. Unfortunately, K-12 students are a captive audience, they can't turn to the 'private sector' for guidance because their families and peers are just as clueless. From: Post Futurist Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Date: Friday, August 28, 2009, 4:14 PM "And leaving politics aside, the *real* stresses of daily life for almost everyone have nothing at all to do with those ancient wars or their after-effects." Nothing at all?? BTW it wasn't a direct linkage--?needless (unless in public schools) to say, conditions are different 1500- 2000 years later. The post wasn't to?even remotely suggest we'll be destroyed as the Roman Empire was; but?when we get to the point that so many are celebrating Michael Jackson and Ted Kennedy as some sort of role models(!), that is quite a stretch. Is it absolutely unreasonable to infer we're devoid of at least conventional morality? Can we say we're just making the rules?up as we go along? I don't know and it is disturbing you?wizards?almost certainly don't have a clue as to today's morality (or lack thereof) and what is to come. The tunes are being played by ear. Schools were?somewhat better?during the '50s and '60s, and probably during the '40s as well. I can't stand to?speak to youths today; the slop teechurs are pouring into their minds. It's not at all encouraging that 100 years?after 1909,?government is still so corrupt. And now such as auto companies can join in for the fun. Correct,?Lee, we're not nearly at war in labor disputes as was the case in 1909; no, instead over a $ trillion, plus hidden costs, we're-- are-- spent on an external?war that will go on for so long?who in their right mind wants to think about it? How much spent on law enforcers, courts, prisons, battered families, costly litigation? and all that jazz... Different from 1909? yes. Better? maybe. I don't know, and it makes me nervous none of you know, either. It is a photo that hasn't been developed yet. ? ? --- On Thu, 8/27/09, Lee Corbin wrote: From: Lee Corbin Subject: [ExI] Civilization, Virtue, and Stress To: "ExI chat list" Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 11:16 PM In "Re: [ExI] Tools for improving health care in the USA, now" Post Futurist wrote: > Stress? sure, there is no civilization. Come now, don't be silly. > America is like ancient Rome.. wealthy, powerful, but no virtue. *No* virtue? Again, you exaggerate wildly. And it's evident that you know very little about ancient Rome. Whatever corruption, mal-distribution of power and influence, disregard for individual rights that we suffer in the modern world, multiply by 10 or 100 to get ancient Rome or Greece. And as for brutality or intimidation by force, there is utterly no comparison. > Dysfunctional families. High crime. As compared to what, when? Of course, it varies a lot from neighborhood to neighborhood and city to city in the West (or in America, as you write), and I'll have to let others speak for their neighborhoods and cities. Yes, there are more dysfunctional families in America than in 1950. Most adults in the slums were married back then, and relatively few children were born out of wedlock. But "dysfunctional" in terms of intra- family tension, alcoholism, and so forth, sadly the situation has never been ideal. And that's the eternal problem in the babblesphere and among the chattering classes: invariably the comparison is made to an ideal, rather than to anything real (past or present). > K-16 Schools that teach students not to think. As compared to when? Besides, to me it's not clear at all that you can "teach someone to think". Yes, some constructivism in education has been all to the good, but some of it is very bad. I would guess that most schools and most home-schoolers are not too far from a happy medium. (I am by no means saying that things can't improve, nor suggesting that anywhere near optimal learning and teaching strategies geared to individuals have yet been found.) > This country is still fighting not only Vietnam, but also the Civil War; and after 144 years. > Stress. you betcha. Okay, there are still echos of both those conflicts, in both politics and daily life. But compared to 1909, when the country was nearly at war with itself (labor vs. business), politically the country today is quite united. And leaving politics aside, the *real* stresses of daily life for almost everyone have nothing at all to do with those ancient wars or their after-effects. Lee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nanogirl at halcyon.com Sun Aug 30 18:43:03 2009 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:43:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) In-Reply-To: <623729E857AE49E5BCDF4765B2D179DC@3DBOXXW4850> References: <4A948BFC.5070003@satx.rr.com> <2d6187670908252249w45b716a9g3f3c8740760b9010@mail.gmail.com><4A94D13C.50408@satx.rr.com><4A94D344.1060900@satx.rr.com> <82DEDCED6DD742EAAB04F5EA913096FC@3DBOXXW4850><4A967E23.8040808@canonizer.com><0962C87C187F48ED89AF3305E9F5C49B@3DBOXXW4850> <623729E857AE49E5BCDF4765B2D179DC@3DBOXXW4850> Message-ID: <7273E03196ED4219AA871870E7398592@3DBOXXW4850> Today is the last day to vote for me everyone! http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html I want to thank those who are helping me with their votes, THANK YOU!!!! Gina "Nanogirl" Miller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gina Miller" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > We've got today and tomorrow left to vote for my animation: > http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html > Thank you everyone who is helping! > Gina > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gina Miller" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 11:55 AM > Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) > > >> Don't forget to vote for my animation again today, thank you my friends - >> from the bottom of my heart. >> http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2009/08/you-can-help-me-win.html >> Gina >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gina Miller" >> To: >> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 3:33 PM >> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >> >> >>> Brent, no I don't see a way to view the current status either! Do you >>> want >>> me to put a reminder up here everyday? If so I can do that... I want to >>> thank you for taking the time out to support me. Yours, Gina >>> www.nanogirl.com >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Brent Allsop" >>> To: "ExI chat list" >>> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:37 AM >>> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Hi Gina, >>>> >>>> I didn't see any way to see scores, or how each video was doing. Is >>>> this >>>> info available? >>>> >>>> I'll try to remember to vote each day till Sunday, as the rules allow. >>>> Wish I would have voted yesterday. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>>> >>>> Gina Miller wrote: >>>>> Thank you so much Natasha! I really appreciate your support : ) >>>>> Gina >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Natasha Vita-More" >>>>> >>>>> To: "'ExI chat list'" >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:59 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [ExI] Me again : ) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Done! (Nice work Gina.) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nlogo1.tif Natasha Vita-More >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >>>>>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina >>>>>> Miller >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:21 AM >>>>>> To: ExI chat list >>>>>> Subject: [ExI] Me again : ) >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm so excited! My animation has been selected by Hewlett Packard as >>>>>> a >>>>>> semi >>>>>> finalist, but to make it as a finalist, I need your votes! You need >>>>>> to >>>>>> be >>>>>> registered at youtube (which is free) >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/create_account >>>>>> then make sure you are signed in and go to >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/hp - >>>>>> (to >>>>>> make sure you are signed in look at the very right top corner of this >>>>>> page >>>>>> to see your user name.) Then up at the top you will see a row of blue >>>>>> tabs, >>>>>> click the "view + vote" tab, you will see my video there among >>>>>> others. I >>>>>> am >>>>>> wearing a black dress with my blonde pony tail down the front of me, >>>>>> the >>>>>> video is called "Who Am I". Click this picture icon to see my video. >>>>>> It >>>>>> is a >>>>>> video about my being a computer animator. After my video pops up you >>>>>> will >>>>>> see on the right side of it that there is a thumbs up and a thumbs >>>>>> down, >>>>>> thumbs up is what you want to click to give me your vote. You are >>>>>> allowed to >>>>>> vote one time a day, all the way through (and including) Sunday. >>>>>> However >>>>>> you >>>>>> are not allowed to vote more than once a day as it is against the >>>>>> rules. >>>>>> But >>>>>> please feel free to spread the word to your friends and family as >>>>>> every >>>>>> vote >>>>>> counts! The prize is 40 thousand dollars and considering my current >>>>>> financial situation you can imagine this would be a wonderful prize >>>>>> indeed. >>>>>> Please vote for me every day and I thank you so kindly for it. Thank >>>>>> you, >>>>>> thank you, thank you so very much!!! I appreciate my fellow >>>>>> extropians >>>>>> always supporting me lo these many years. Yours, Gina "Nanogirl" >>>>>> Miller >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Gina "Nanogirl" Miller >>>>>> Nanotechnology Industries >>>>>> http://www.nanoindustries.com >>>>>> Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com >>>>>> Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/ Craft blog: >>>>>> http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/ Foresight Senior Associate >>>>>> http://www.foresight.org >>>>>> Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com >>>>>> "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> extropy-chat mailing list >>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Aug 30 19:32:34 2009 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:32:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] No Copenhagen Protocol? Message-ID: <580930c20908301232h2bfa6618p5eb9f6f9cd0212fc@mail.gmail.com> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/20/postpone_kyoto/ <<'Postpone Kyoto successor', urges climate boffin Doing nothing is better than doing something stupid in Copenhagen By Andrew Orlowski ? Get more from this author Posted in Environment , 20th August 2009 11:28 GMT The chances of an international climate agreement being made at Copenhagen in December were already looking unlikely - but Japanese scientist Dr Syun Akasofu thinks we may as well call it off completely. The Copenhagen Conference is where the successor to the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty to reduce CO2 emissions, is due to be signed. It's big business for climate quangos - one of the preliminary conferences in Poznan attracted 10,000 attendees, and that was just one of several preliminaries 'on the road to Copenhagen'. Akasofu reasons that because the USA and China will be developing coal for some years, until they can build out their nuclear energy capacity any promises to make cuts will be what he calls "rhetorical". India has already politely declined Western advice to de-industrialise (before it's barely begun to industrialise), and has rejected calls for CO2 emissions targets. "Is it useful to have any more conferences on global warming?" he asks in a paper published on Tuesday, adding that "such conferences are useless, although they are better than a world war". Akasofu accepts the hypothetical effects of CO2 to cause global warming, but says the observations point only a weak correlation (the rapid release of CO2 into the atmosphere since 1946 hasn't created a disaster) and absolutely no evidence of causation - so more science must be done. "Temporary or not, there must be unknown forces and causes to suppress the CO2 effect or even overcome it. In science, unlike in politics, a minority can be right," he adds. Akasofu was founding director of the International Arctic Research Center in Alaska, and is a former director of the Geophysical Institute. He was in a majority of scientists in a report for the Japanese Energy Commission which questioned the idea that industrial greenhouse gas emissions are primarily responsible for climate change, and which we partially translated here. You can download his paper here (pdf) . After another preliminary (this time in Bonn) ended last week, the EU's information website EurActive reportedthat: "Observers are now toning down their expectations for Copenhagen, as a complete agreement seems to be slipping out of sight in favour of a basic framework that could then be filled with substance in the course of 2010." In June, Russia said it would release 30 per cent more greenhouse gases by 2020, with President Dmitry Medvedev stating: "We will not cut off our development potential." With China and India backing him, economic growth could be the big winner in Copenhagen. >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: