atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,
atomic_fungus
atomic_fungus

#6440: Oh, wow

Slept in like the biggest slug ever. But I don't have to be to work tomorrow until 2.5 hours after I had to be at work on Friday, and furthermore my commute will be measured in feet rather than miles.

All this means I won't have to get up early for work; this also means I don't need to go to bed before 10 PM as I have been. So sleeping in on my day off is perfectly fine.

* * *

Today's crop of "interesting":

OPEC is making some deep production cuts. However, Iran is not beholden to them, and the biggest non-US consumers of oil (such as China) will buy from them. The oil that gets bought from Iran takes the place of oil bought from elsewhere, thus reducing demand for it, thus keeping the price of oil lower than it otherwise would be.

Besides that, though, the US is the biggest producer of oil in the world, and the US is not part of OPEC.

A sensible energy policy would include encouraging our oil companies to modernize their refinement infrastructure and equip themselves for processing the kind of crude oil we produce. If we really wanted to, as the politicians say, "reduce our dependence on foreign oil", that would be the way to do it, and would be vastly more effective than all the biofuel initiatives in history. As it stands now, for the most part our refineries can't handle the kind of oil we're producing.

But US energy policy over the past thirty, forty years has been anything but sensible.

* * *

Fred on feminism. Feminism makes absolutely no sense whatsoever until you realize that the pro-female stuff is a thin veneer of purpose over a bloated sack of communism.

Fred begins by asking whatever became of lefism:
In my capacity of shade-tree anthropologist at large, I am trying to make sense of the far Left. It is tough sledding. Most of it makes as much sense as lug nuts on a birthday cake. Help me. I am really confused.

I can't see that the Left actually is Left, I mean. The Left in its more practical embodiments used to be the champion of the working man. It fought for unions, good pay, benefits and job security. Conditions were horrible in America's mines and factories. Things were ugly, and Leftists often got hurt or, occasionally, killed trying to remedy them.

Today's "Left" is the party of Bill and Hill, of George Soros and the half-educated narcissists of Hollywood rolling in dough, of excessively comfortable academics and the media, all of whom use ethnic minorities as voting fodder but want nothing to do with them. When do you think was the last time Hillary or Megyn Kelly was in a truck stop or Legion hall, or had dinner in a restaurant where most of the diners were black?

The Left is now hostile to working men, called "deplorables" in an unwise moment of honesty by Hillary. Can you imagine Saul Alinsky or Leon Trotsky worrying about transgender bathrooms or cultural appropriation? And it is a weirdly teenage Left in which most seem ten or fiftten years younger that their chronologic age. Oh good.
I understand Fred's confusion, because I know the basic error that he's making in his consideration of this.

The left was never about supporting the little guy. Fred bought the sales pitch, that leftism is all about saving the proletariat, but like a shifty used car salesman the left uses a sales pitch which is entirely propagandistic: half-truths and technicalities are the best you get, and most of the time it's pure falsehood.

The left did fight for unions and good pay and so forth for the workers. Of course they did; think about it--you need a lot of people on your side, to pay the bills. You unionize the workers wiht the promise of better pay etc, which gets them to vote for unionizing. Once unionized, you can make the capitalists pay the workers more (in benefits and so forth) and you take a tithe from each worker in the union. You, as the union boss, now have a pool of money to use to start buying politicians, and of course you pay yourself a nice salary for your troubles.

Of course you end up being the union boss. The workers believe in you once you've gotten them all that good stuff, so naturally they vote you in as the head of the union. The leftists that got hurt or killed? "Omelettes, eggs." Martyrs for a cause.

Look at who organized the protests and financed them. Their names had things in them like "Communist" or "Socialist", nearly all of them, one way or another. All were informed by Marx. All had as their goal--overt or not--smashing the "capitalist system".

The goal of leftism is not some nebulous good for the common man. The goal of leftism is control of the common man--perfect, total, unending control. The goal of leftists is to be the ones in charge of the common man, and to become extremly wealthy in the process.

It has always been thus. It will not change.

* * *

You have to ask how this was done. So some climatologists have analyzed the records of Greenland's ice melt, and have concluded that it's a hockey stick exactly like Mann's hockey stick, because Reasons.

The records prior to 1960 are entirely "reconstructed", though, meaning that they used some kind of proxy data. Understand, that's exactly what Mann did with his hockey stick; the level part of the graph was reconstructed from data cherry-picked to give the desired result.

This graph for Greenland's ice melt does not tally with anything but Mann's discredited graph. It does not tally with the satellite temperature data, nor does it tally with the raw temperature data we've seen from other sources. It doesn't match anything but a fraudulent piece of trash.

So, no, I don't believe it.

If there were observable and definite warming anywhere else--if the warming didn't require that the data be "normalized" before it showed up--then I might consider the possibility that the planet might be warming. But it doesn't; none of the other data shows that, at least not until it's been fiddlated and adjustered out of reality.

None of the other data shows that.

And all of this presumes that warmer temperatures are a problem, which is another thing that hasn't even been successfully argued let alone disproven. The only thing climatologists could do about the medieval warm period was to wish it away, to eradicate it from the data.

Whatever those guys are doing, it isn't science, not by a long shot.

* * *

Well, that bathroom wall is not going to sand itself, as much as I wish it would. *sigh*
Subscribe

  • #7599: Front and sides cut!

    So, I did it: came home from work and went right outside and cut the front grass, and the sides. Did a few other minor chores outside, with the…

  • #7598: FIVE?

    How the hell is it five already? I took a nap-- Guess I needed it. * * * The ham and bean soup, in the refrigerator, took on the consistency of…

  • #7597: Sunday, and the grass needs to be cut

    Yes, it's mid-April now, and it's been warm, and it rained. Today it rained and it's still wet out there, so no good to cut it right now. So, we'll…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments