atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#1030: STILL no sunspots.

Since March of last year. So that makes it, what 13 months since we had sunspot activity? We have seen that sunspot activity leads global temperature: high sunspot activity means higher global temperatures. And the last time sunspot activity went this low was shortly before (and during) the Little Ice Age.

I haven't heard anything about sunspot activity since earlier this year, and this article is the kind of thing I've been keeping an eye out for; it's not inaccurate to say that I'm waiting to see when the sunspot cycle starts.

This is extra-cool. MP3 player doubles as cassette adaptor. I need this. Besides, if I ever get a time machine, it'll come in handy.

Ann Coulter discusses Barak Hussein Obama's Weatherman friend. I love Ann Coulter.

Toyota is the #1 auto manufacturer in the world. It used to be GM. Now it's not. And it's going to get worse when the new CAFE standards kick in.

ABC thinks that a tax increase will help the economy. It says so in the headline: "Can a porn tax boost CA's economy?"

This only makes sense if you think that all money belongs to the government and it just lets you use some for a while because it's nice. Yeah.


California's economy suffers from a surfeit of taxation as it is. This article reminds me of a Monty Python sketch in which a group of government officials are having a meeting, trying to think of new things to tax, when one says, "All of the other things we do for pleasure have been taxed. Drinking's been taxed; smoking's been taxed. Except one: ...'thingy'."

"Thingy" is never explained, except that the sketch makes it obvious that it's not going to the bathroom. It's obvious that "thingy" is sexual in nature: "Well! would make chartered accountancy a much more interesting job."

This is California thinking about taxing "thingy". *sigh*

* * *

I'm too tired to write more.

* * *

UPDATE: Phil Chapman, referenced in the first link of this post, gives dire warnings about global cooling.
There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do. There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada. Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling will decrease it.

Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it (such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate),...
And what are we doing? WE ARE BURNING FOOD.

If things get bad enough, expect eco-nuts to be hanging from the streetlights. By their necks.

  • Post a new comment


    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.
  • 1 comment