This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Currency War: 140 Years of Monetary History In Ten Minutes
From "why did Nixon sever the link between currencies and gold?" to "is war good for the economy?" Mike Maloney's tour de force through 140 years of gold, silver, and monetary farce is indispensable as major parts of the world enter a de-dollarization phase. As Jesse noted here, after listening to this presentation, one can surely understand why the central banks both fear and covet gold. It resists their wills, but has a natural tendency to be seen as money. Money is power, after all, and greed will too often refuse to relinquish any power or claim willingly, even to its own destruction. The American abuse of financial power for political purposes is causing a bifurcation in global finance, along the expected fault lines, and it will be interesting to see how that develops. Maloney's bottom-line, we are overdue for a new monetary system.
»
- 39835 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This is how all currencies and Empires die.
They spend themselves into oblivion
Read Cicero on Rome.
Most telling.
Almost could just change people's names for the broad policies and actions are identical.
The reason we have The Fed is because some progressive politicians 100 years ago, disregarded the Constitution, and saw the unlimited financial power that private bankers and their fractional reserve banking could give to the Govt. They didn't read the fine print that said this would bankrupt the country in Debt.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Total Debt per citizen is now over 193K. Maybe someone should tell those crossing the border how much they owe.
Oh, they'll pay their share with the new EDT card. Electronic Debt Transfer card.
Simple...
Press 2 to speak Engrish
Gold was very difficult to undermine, but sure enough they found a way to do it.
Just re-hypothicate the stuff and BAM! Instant increase in gold. Need more? Just keep re-hypothicating.
Didn't take long to realize that re-hypothication is just a fancy word for counterfeiting.
The lesson: If you don't hold it in your hands, you don't hold it at all.
gh0atrider is sorry, he came from a family that liked golds. It was very difficult coming out to parents and saying he liked bits instead.
Fuck your 3rd person, ass.
No fuck him!
People lately act as if gold was not the basis of all monetary scams including fractional reserve.
Kinda like saying that a knife was the basis for all crime.
Friend of Another: Start with gold standard, people will find ways to turn it into trash. This is not a United States problem. This is a world problem.
The only solution is freegold.
Whoever gave you the junk needs a throat punch.
Iridium ol buddy ol pal,
He ain't the real FOFOA...
(Of course I am not either.)
EDIT:
I remember ZH publishing one of FOFOA's columns a while back ("The Shoeshine Boy", easy to Google this article on Zero Hedge itself).
Don't let a huckster taint the reputation of a world-recognized top gold analyst.
While it is quite a slog, "Pieces of Eight" is worth the read. Why? The committee minutes from 1849 reveal a seldom discussed concept: the use of gold and silver as money.
The Congressmen were aware of an important function of money: it must be used or it will die.
Paper money, fiat currences, etc are not new concepts, they are millenia old. Like social credit, it provides liquidity and convenience when compared to precious metals. While attempts were aways made to tie paper to something of real value (specie redemption), these same attempts were always found wanting, because the bankers controlled the politicians and businessmen.
As a people, we have to make a choice: continue to use paper money and fractional reserve banking or repudiate them through the use of precious metals or other forms of social credit and commodity monies or combinations thereof.
Social credit requires community and knowledge of those you deal with, but it provides liquidity with timed settlements via agreement. Both social credit and settlement metals are near impossible to track or tax. While they are probably insufficient for major corporate dealings, for all us little guys (and most of the population are little guys) it could be an ideal method of financial and political revolution.
Coordinated with other forms of non-compliance and refusal to sanction the current tyrannical regimes, it could lead to a form of social organization which is much more palatable and at variance with established Elites.
We "know" how money functions as a means to lubricate trade, now we need to exclude those whom would use it as a tool to enslave us through debt and value creation alchemy. We have the means to free ourselves, but it will require we step out from our caves and engage our neighbors in solidarity in purpose and form.
The US has followed the same road - in fast-forward.
The Republic collapses and becomes Empire with any pretense of representing citizens disappearing. Wealth is no longer produced withing Rome but comes from conquered peoples. Yet in time that starts drying up. The conquered peoples no longer WANT to be Rome's subjects.
Wealth becomes more and more concentrated. - some citizens sell themselves into slavery willingly. The money is debased to worthlessness. Citizens no longer serve in the military - that becomes a mercenary endeavor as the Empire struggles to hold onto power and influence.
Of course it all collapses - as all overstretched and overspent endeavors do.
Sadly, Chaos and Dark Ages follow.
People will re-establish trade very quickly because they must. The trick is to keep whatever they choose to be a conveyer of value out of govt /bossman control.
That is the sticky wicket.
A quart of booze is easier than a barrel of oil but gold is the best conveyer of value if it's purity can be assayed.
Empires spend themselves oblivious because they have lost moral authority in the eyes of the governed. They are buying time. Their evil ways have been detected. Time for the cover up wars. Started by the evil dictator who 'came out of nothing'.
the dark ages are upon us...
America or the entire developed world for that matter would not have grown to what it is now if the dollar were still tied to gold.
This whole concept is just a gold bugs wet dream that one day gold will revalue to the world currency.
If that happened which is impossible it would not become a greater store of value because there is not enough of it, by several orders of magnitude, to the current role of currency. Everything would come to a screaming halt.
There will be a point in the near future where metals soar and thats when to sell out and buy all the tangible necessities you can because that means we are approaching the bottleneck.
The assumption being that the modern world is preferable to the old? Why? The pollution? Non-stop wars? Revolutions? Genocides? etc. As if we could not have a better world if the Elites were incapacitated?
Trotting out the old argument of not enough gold is laughable. That is the lesson of hyperinflation in money systems. Gold just "re-valued" to maintain a true sense of value.
Trade has never come to a screaming halt, anywhere or anytime. Paper currencies have failed continuously. You must be confused, for one is not the other.
So are you are going to declare by fiat what price oil exporters have to take?
The gold-oil-ratio has been fairly stable, with, if anything, gold slowly deflating against oil, esp. since 1980...
While gold is easily revalued against currencies, it is not so against other commodities...
Why would I declare anything? The market is quite capable of valuing gold against oil or any other product.
I never suggested a set value for gold, you're too smart to be so disingeious Flak. However, explain why it is not easily re-valued against other commodities. Oh wait, YOU ASSUME a State dictate. That is where the problem started in the first place, an erroneous SCOTUS argument in favor of tender status for paper money in violation of the Constitution.
Arguing from ignorance is not your strong suit Flak...
You clearly misunderstood what I was getting at...
There was a very good reason why Nixon reneged on BW... It was to do with the flow of oil and the stock of gold. US gold reserves would not have lasted 10 years given the explosion in imports once US production peaked in 1970...
Don't go creating strawman. Ceteris paribus, the price of all commodities is easily expressible in gold independent of any fiat MOE. These ratios well defined using historical data that overlaps the end of BW.
If gold was to be basis of international trade, then you would have to by fiat revalue it against oil. And I can assure you that oil exporters would not be very ammenable to the idea of making their oil cheaper...
Really? It had nothing to do with tying the value of the dollar to oil instead of gold? It had nothing to do with fractional reserve banking and debt creation to transfer wealth? Bretton woods was a con job, a means to complete the destruction of gold as money and move us into paper only.
Oil is meaningless. It is an energy source. There are other energy sources. Oil is used for a purpose. The Elites don't allow other sources of energy and will not until they are ready to control the market with the new source.
Just as fractional reserve banking is the method of value exchange they control.
It is about control. Control. Control.
Gold is a great liberator. Silver is a great llberator. Social credit is a great liberator, Production and the minimalization of consumption is a great liberator. Statists fear liberation.
Without oil the world grinds to a halt...
Agricultural production and distribution collapses...
Gold on the other hand is easily replaceable as a MOE...
----
BTW, How many gallons of diesel does your farm use in a given year?
You seem to be ignorant of bio-dynamics in farming. I use zero gallons of diesal or gasoline to farm.
Without oil the world grinds to a halt? So the history of mankind began in the late 1800's? No sailing ships? Horses, Bicycles, oxen pulled plows? The Amish? They stopped farming?
Agricultural production would collapse, then reboot locally. Amazingly, people are adaptable...
You don't have a tractor? You don't bring your produce to market?
Yep, it will reboot, minus a few billion excess people and then we can all happily live in a subsistence level post apocolyptic agricultural society...
What do you figure? 60 years? 100 years?
So the renaissance and age of reasoning were low points in human development? We are not living a subsistence level life now as debt slaves? It would be preferable to live in slavery with iphones and soylent green?
You decry the dangers of climate change and energy depletion, then worry about the excess population created by a false age of cheap energy? The same population creating the climate change?
Quit creating strawmen...
I make no such claims, I only point out the conundrum of our current situation as a rhetorical device. As far as the direction taken, the choice is ours, pointing out the options is hardly taking sides. And very soon, the illusion that we even have certain choices will be revealed as such. Tipping points are usually acknowledged only in the rear view mirror.
I, for one, abhor the idea of playing God, unfortunately, there are many that have no qualms about it...
Why? You don't like competition? Having it tossed back at you?
The choice is ours, on a personal level and that will be the limit of its' effectiveness. If every factoid you have assembled is true, it will mean nothing unless the Elites agree to implement it. If every man, woman and child declare for change, it will come to nought if the Elites tune us out.
Revolution or status quo? How enslaved to the convenience of modern society are you? Do you drive a car? Heat and cool your home? Sewer? Water treatment? Asphalt and concrete roads? Supermarkets? How close are you to being carbon neutral? How about everyone else? Globally? China?
Personally, I think there are much greater problems than climate change. I live as close to the earth as I can and always have. It has always felt "right". I didn't need a scientific argument. When I look out on my farm, I see a vibrant, healthy environment flush with every kind of critter imaginable, above and below the ground. I drink water from the earth, food from my garden and fields and put the waste back into the same ground.
I don't need someone to tell me what to do or how to conduct my life. Unfortunately, too many people either by desire or compulsion do not live the same way. So, what will you do Flak? What kind of choices are you making? What do you go without? Instead of telling me why climate change exists, tell me what you are personally doing to combat it. How are you getting the lead out of the environment?
Don't bother.
You're dealing with brain-lock. OIL GAAAAAH.
You're right. Gold flowed out because the excess of dollars to gold ratio was screwed and Degaulle knew it. They committed fraud and were caught.
Oil imports mean nothing as long as your export values exceed the cost of oil. This means far less oil for wasteful consumption and more oil to productive value add uses.
Had we maintained a gold standard we wouldn't have the blight of excess waste and mis-allocation of capital that reserve currency status allowed us to steal from around the world.
We simply wouldn't have the money for it. For all the various inputs, A country's balance of trade is no different from your check book.
Is a 5% chance of an anthropogenically driven mass extinction cause for action, let alone alarm? 10% 50%. Are you willing to roll the dice, or worse yet, leave it in "Gods Hands"?
As for your farm, the people of Petra and the Mayans saw pretty much the same in their farms as well, to cite just a few...
And nobody is telling you how to live your life, only that you be willing to foot the cost of your choices. Very simple really. I am more than willing to pay whatever price society deems necessary....
I don't see a single thing your committed to listed here. So, all talk and no action? Still trying the emotion driven gambit for your argument?
You're telling me I have to go along with whatever YOUR scientists recommend. That is your argument, is it not? Your saying I cannot ignore their conclusions and thereby MUST change. That IS telling someone what to do. Your willing to pay any price? What if society chooses no price at all? That is acceptable?
Pretty flaccid thinking...
Sorry but I will not be martyr that you think I should be...
If the world chooses to go off a cliff, I will act in my best interests. And if the world decides to try and avoid the cliff, I will also act in my best interests. The difference being those actions are not necessarily the same nor are there required to be...
I hate to admit it, but Ayn would concur....
So, no having the "courage of your convictions"? Is this why scientists have no integrity? :)
Ayn is not big in my world concept...
Fuck you....
Find someone else to play word games with...
word games and gaming the system. 7K gross revenue is the magic number to be considered a "farm business" in certain jurisdictions (ie: Ontario). Sorry Sean7K, fail, but by all means carry on with your purist idealology.
except tractors, locomotives, and cargo ships use very small amounts of oil. as in biofuels with small improvements might be able to sustain food production at high levels until something like phosphorus shortages force changes in farming methods. all this assuming wasteful consumption could be curtailed, a big if. but horses and sailboats are not good ways to move stuff around.
What fraction of US oil use is directly related to agricultural production (including livestock)?
Try ~25-30%....
Or roughly 1/2 of all domestic oil production...
not even close. these studies claiming 10x embodied fossil fuels for every calorie consumed are misleading. they include things like hot water for dish washing and fancy restaurants. direct costs for fertilizers, tractors, locomotives, cargo ships, and refrigeration are only a few times the embodied energy of the food, and not all from oil.
in india for example, total energy consumption is 19 kwh/p/d. compared to america, where total energy consumption is 250 kwh/p/d, the entire food chain estimated at 27 kwh/p/d, and calories consumed 3 kwh/p/d. the indians aren't dead, and 19 kwh/p/d can conceivably be provided by renewables.
The USDA clearly disagrees with you
http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/136418/err94_1_.pdf
http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/1104145/eib112.pdf
thank you for validating my point. agriculture and transportation use 3% of total US energy. the rest can be vastly curtailed. see india.
You didn't read the fine print...
figure 7: branding, marketing, services, packaging, processing, hot water for dishes, storing frozen beef in your freezer for 6 months. OPTIONAL. just like trading MBS, CDS, and carbon credits. food needs to be grown, moved, stored for a short period, cooked, and eaten. everything else is a luxury. see the rest of the world.
Quit making shit up...
Neither figure 7 deals with what you are saying...
for my love of god i will walk you through this step by step. Canning paper FIG 7. now scroll up to see what is in each category, mostly unnecessary crap. for sure gristmills are required, but what kind of other processing is NECESSARY or even desired for that matter. now cf. table 7.4 of http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/sewtha.pdf to see what is in "household" category. cooking and refrigeration should use less than 1 QBTU/yr in america. and no, you will not be driving your suv to the grocery store, you will take public transit or ride a motorbike. we could easily reduce the food chain to 5 QBTU/yr to match, drumroll.... the rest of the world! the horror!
Read the introduction of Canning, pg. 1. In particular the comments regarding the work of Pimental et al.
We are clearly shouting past each other, moveover, Canning is concerned primarily with the changes in energy use in the food system so he is not so much interested in the more difficult absolute estimate of energy use...
i am aware of pimentel's work. my claim is simply that the absolutely essential fundamentals of food production like fertilizers, tractor fuel, rail/ocean freight, are not that expensive. 3rd world countries survive by focusing on these fundamentals and forgoing the luxuries we enjoy. but to claim lots of people absolutely must starve is unfounded, though they very well may if we continue to drive our cars and planes in endless circles.
Yes, in current dollars food is still cheap and will stay "cheap" for a some time yet in the Western world. It is likely to be the climate that breaks about a significant failure in agriculture before a decline in oil production does.
Re: the US, I don't see the suburbs ever getting the pop. dens. necessary to support a 3rd world style of food distribution. Already there exists food deserts where the only alternative is corn based fast food that is disproportionately hydrocarbon dependent. Better make sure the distribution network doesn't go down for long though or it will get ugly very fast...
Word has it your a 'woman' is that true Flakmeister? Doesn't matter to me if you are just curious to know if the rumor is true.
For Tall Tom it helps him focus his anger if he thinks I am a women. Something to do with being raised by a lesbian (his words, see below) and having unresolved anger issues....
But like most rumors, this one has zero credibility. sorry to disappoint you...
Just checking....
our biggest export is excess dollars, we basically export our inflation. for some reason, other countires are still willing to accept pieces of paper with a number printed on them in exchange for real goods and commodities. cant last forever.
How different would the US be if Nixon stuck to the gold standard while cutting spending and abandoning the Great Society and the War on Poverty...
Jimmy Carter tried it they lynched him for it.
Jimmy Carter turned the thermostat in the Oval Orifice to 55, slipped on a cardigan which he got out of the empty suitcase he carried for show and had a roaring fucking fire in the fireplace.
Fuck Jimmy Carter.
But I do miss him so, right now.
Knucks, you don't miss Jimmy Carter. You miss the late 70's as do I. It was a great time to be full of shit and 20. But it is over. Belushi is dead. We are stuck with the fucktard Kenyan and the wicked witch in the Eccles hall of Mordor.
Jimmy Carter also tried reining in the CIA and the other behind he scenes powers and was kneecapped for it. Frankly, I'm suprised he didn't meet some unfortunate death as others have.
Funny how Ronnie changed his tune on so many things when he got the nomination - and how he was shot when he started talkign again about downsizing government. HW pretty much ran foreign affairs under Reagan - and pretty much EVERYTHING after he was shot.
The Bush clan has a deep and dark history going back beyond Union Bank..... but then EVERY President since Carter ahs been vetted by the CIA et. al. For Clinton, Google Mena Arkansas and look into Obama's mother's family......
Reagan was never a fiscal conservitive, even in CA. He was a great liar.
Read ....Conspiracy: Bush, Clinton, and the CIA. That covers Mena and Barry Seal pretty well.
It had nothing to do with deficit spending, it all had to do with the flows of oil...
Either give up oil or give up gold....
What would you choose?
Flak, I've been respectful enough to leave your "global warming" theseus/thesis alone.
Don't even pretend to know f/x trading.
I don't respect Flak YC on GW. I mean if anyone takes the time to investigate the global warming, CO2 is a pollutant, tax the air we exhale looting FRAUD they would have clarity on how full of shit Flak is on this swindle.
What's criminal, are those that know the data has never supported their brain dead theory but perpetrate the lie anyway. I'm hoping Flak is just naive and ignorant and has succumb to believing in an image whose motives are to loot the masses blind! I would have respect for him if he recognized, once learning and understanding the truth through critical thinking research, that he was in error and just admitted it.
This is what Dr. David Evans did, he was a former modeler for the Australian Greenhouse Office, now prominent skeptic. He explains the reasons for his change of mind and why he's become so vocal on the issue.
He pulls the covers off this scam like Ayn Rand pulled the covers off Statism, both doing it with surgical precision!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI3doCKhI7Q
Save your breath...
The Kochs would pay him millions if he was correct and could show it...
That tells you all you need to know...
Global warming is all about monopoly profits, nothing more. When people need a product there is a low elasticity of demand, so if you reduce supply you can extract monopoly, higher, profits. With a normal product you could switch away, beef, chicken, pork, but not with electricity. Sorry you did not pick up on the con game.
And that is the game, now move on.
Beer-Lambert Law is A=E*C*P (absorbance=molar extinction coefficent times concentration times path length). Doing the calculation at CO2 absorbance frequncy of about 2350 cm-1 shows even 10 ppm CO2 would absorb all of the blackbody radiation emitted from the earth at that frequency. So that band is opaque to radiation at any point in past history or the future. Increased CO2 concenration is irrelevent. The only meaningful change in temperature behavior due to gas concentration is due to water vapor. That is easy to show looking at average daily maximum and minimum tempertures and thier differences as a function of humidity. For instance look at the temperature records for Houston and Denver. The temperature differences in Houston between day and night are small and Denver large. Blackbody radiation is held in the atmosphere at night in Houston and it escapes in Denver.
Did forget that you have propagate the longwave IR spectrum line by line treating each increase in altitude as a new source as the IR is re-emited isotropically almost immediately after absorption...
Do that and you find that you still have flux after you claim things are full absorbed...
But why listen to me, write a paper explaining to the experts that they got it wrong. Tell Roy Spencer or Judith Curry, the two closest things left that resemble real scientists that challenge AGW, see what they say...
Do you want their e-mail addresses? Better yet, tell them at their blogs about your deep insight....
Or you could simply see for yourself, this would be a good start:
http://www.geo.mtu.edu/~scarn/teaching/GE4250/transmission_lecture.pdf
And of course there is always real data:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/saturated-co2-effect-advanced.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/infrared_spectrum.jpg
You can see immediately that the skepticalscience reference is just propaganda since in the diagram the band is drawn absurdly broadly (and they picked the low energy band for some reason). And of course the concept of scattering is ignored. Whatever radiation that is absorbed in the atmosphere is scattered back to space and thus even the incoming radiation from the sun never reaches the ground at the absorbing frequencies.
Wow, why don't simply write a paper or tell them for yourself...
Better sort out the difference between incoming shortwave and outgoing longwave radiation lest you make a fool of yourself...
BTW, that diagram is not drawn, it is real data...
And then there is this measurement of the difference in outgoing radiation between 1970 and 1998:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/harries_radiation.gif
taken from
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6826/abs/410355a0.html
Arguing the details of climate science with Flak is a waste of time, unless you are yourself a climate scientist.
Fortunately, the (currently-accepted) scientific minutiae are irrelevant to determining whether she should be believed, just as knowing the details of how to swing a racquet are irrelevant when it comes to determining whether McEnroe missed a serve.
The models that Flak and her fellow 'the-science-is settled' travellers came up with completely failed to predict the current 17+ year hiatus in warming. That is all you need to know; for all their bluster, they don't know how the climate works. Maybe they will one day; but given that they continually have told us they understood enough of it to make actionable predictions - but clearly don't - means they can be trusted no more than your average central banker.
Now Flak will probably say that 17+ years is just volatility... whereas the 47 years of warming since 1950 is a definite proof of the trend due to man-released CO2.
We'll ignore that the Earth has been warming since the end of the last little ice age... why? Because Flak and all the 'scientists' - who rely on grants that in turn rely on AGW alarmism being accepted - tell us to.
You are intellectually, scientifically, and morally bankrupt, Flak.
And not very smart, either, I'm sorry to say.
Big Jim....
We can always count on you for empty sophistries mixed with a twisted factoid or two...
Actually the trend had been cooling since ~7000 BCE until the Industrial Revolution really kicked in...
Would you all stop wasting your breath.
The SUN will have the final say on climate, and right now it's saying, "You assholes think you're in charge? Try a grand minima on for size!"
Hope your long undies are mended.
The sun does play a big role, but variations in the solar output are now smaller than the effect of C02 and have been for nigh on 40 years....
Psst, this would be effect of new Grand Minima:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Grand_Solar_Min_1024.jpg
That plot is a very poor "guess" based on models that can not be proven, tested, or validated.
You are a flippin' flack.
Thus says the rocket scientist.
You are going to have to do better than that, my little troll...
PS Do you mean like this?
http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/model2box_soi.jpg?w=500&h=322
The sun does play a big role, but variations in the solar output are now smaller than the effect of C02 and have been for nigh on 40 years....
Woman,
It does not.
If CO2 blocks Thermal Radiant Energy from escaping the Earth then the same "Blanket" also REFLECTS SOLAR THERMAL RADIANT ENERGY before it ever reaches the lower atmosphere. The Solar Radiant Energy never makes it beneath the CO2 "Blanket".
So where is the Heat Source? Can it be from the Radioactive Decay of Heavy Elements in the Core and the Mantle of the Earth? Can it be from the lost heat from the inefficient use of Fossil Fuels?
Your analysis demonstrates that you, as well as the person who constructed the model, have little understanding of Solar Physics, Geophysics and Thermodynamics.
Stop being a whiny, little, lying bitch. Stop it.
\facepalm...
Remind us what the spectral overlap is between the incoming solar radiation and outgoing radiation originating at the earth's surface.
TT, take my advice, stick to hurling insults, this science thingie is clearly beyond your grasp...
Stop being a lying cunt.
If there was not thermal Radiation from the core this Planet would not sustain life.
If you care to debate intelligently then I suggest that you become honest about simple topics...as your gender.
Your bitch behavior is really unattractive. It is repulsive. Nobody whom values themselves want to associate with, or, be around a raging bitch.
I expect honesty and you are not meeting my expectations. So stop being a bitch.
Do you get it? I will expose the fact that you are a woman on every comment thread where I see you post.
Really I cannot understand why you are so ashamed at that. But you are for some reason.
So stop being a bitch.
Yes, if you extend the trend to some (irrelevant) far off point in the past, you can say it's been cooling... extend it even further, though, back to the last ice age... and it's been warming! Wow! Nice work, girlfriend.
Flakmeister: queen of the cherry-picked dataset.
Any other sophomoric sophistries you'd like to waste everyone's time with?
You are such a silly goose, and you really should get up to speed with the latest material:
Here is a free copy of the paper:
http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics%207004/Marcott_Global%20Temp...
Pay attention to figure 1....
BTW, the irony of someone using the term "cherrypick" while making claims about "17 years" is hilarious...
Now run along troll...
You are such a silly goose, and you really should get up to speed with the latest material:
Haha, I accuse you of cherry picking and posting irrelevancies... and then you prove it in your very next post! BTW - why is the 'latest' thinking on the subject so important? You mean the science isn't settled?
BTW, the irony of someone using the term "cherrypick" while making claims about "17 years" is hilarious...
Well, obviously, if the warming has stopped (contrary to your brethren's predictions), obviously we're going to take the cessation from when it started, aren't we? Are you genuinely this stupid? Because you're not fooling anyone here, girlfriend. We had you pegged on this subject long ago, now you're just confirming what we already know - that you're either genuinely unable to follow a train of thought, or are intellectually dishonest.
Just for you...
http://trololololololololololo.com/
Hey Flak, how are you?
I have questions: if everything you say is true and the answer requires the Elites to sacrifice their power and wealth, will they allow it to happen?
Therefore, in a medium they completely control (education, world governance/UN), why would there exist a priority on environmental action? Further, since they are the promoters and progenitors of the massive pollution of air, water and food on Earth, why are they concerned with climate change?
Can one group of Elites be anymore evil than another?
Should we not be concerned with their objectives?
Or do you really thnk science operates in a vacuum, free from the heavy handedness of political and economic realities?
Do you never consider the motivations behind State policiy objectives?
You're a smart cookie Flak, too smart to be one dimensional.
Doing dandy....thanks for asking...
I am only debating the science, how humanity chooses to deal with it is another kettle of fish...
But to say, as many do here, that the science is wrong because the they don't the implications vis a vis the political economy is a fallacy and the mark of intellectual bankruptcy. It would far more honest for them to simply say that they don't care about the future beyond the extent of their own selfishness...
I'll ignore the implied slur on the integrity and motives of the scientific community. That is really beneath you and only shows your ignorance of the real scientific process. The paid for shills of the corporate world are very obvious.
I'll ignore the implied slur on the integrity and motives of the scientific community. That is really beneath you and only shows your ignorance of the real scientific process.
Would this be the same scientific community whose members invented nuclear weapons, Zyklon-B, napalm, and depleted uranium munitions?
Knowledge of the 'scientific process' has absolutely no bearing on determining whether individual scientists are any more or less venal than any other human beings... or any less examples of Upton Sinclair's observation regarding people not understanding something when their paycheck relies on them not understanding it. Like them not understanding that failing to predict the current 17+ year hiatus in warming mean the rest of their predictions can't be relied on.
You're the anti-Science person here, Flak. Your AGW crusading is based on faith... or maybe outright shillery, I'm not sure which.
Go away troll...
Wow. What a rebuttal. Are they now paying you for brevity?
When you make a valid point I will consider something more substantial...
At least the guy that misunderstood how the Beer-Lambert Law is applied to the atmosphere was trying, you are just playing with empty rhetoric. Science is not a court room drama...
No, you're right, science is admitting when you've got it wrong and moving on. Seeing as you zealots have got it wrong for 17+ years, if you were remotely scientific you'd admit you've got a lot more research to do before being able to predict the climate.
But then, if the public weren't being fed a constant stream of scare stories, they might decide to vote in politicians who'd cut your research grants, mightn't they? No more climate junkets for Hackmeister and her cronies... you'd have to earn your living by adding some actual value. Couldn't have that now, could we? Too much like work.
Getting exactly what wrong for 17 years?
Stop making shit up...
She is just being a bitch. She cannot even be honest about the fact that she is a woman. How can you expect any honesty in any other facet of her character. ("Meister", means "Mister" in German).
I'm not worried about her gender, to be frank. I think it's quite sensible to take precautions regarding personal details on the net; let the 'security' 'services' 'earn' their money.
If she let it be known she's a woman she'd be attacked on the basis of her gender, rather than her poor logic and outright AGW shillery, which is my beef with her.
"If she let it be known she's a woman she'd be attacked on the basis of her gender, rather than her poor logic and outright AGW shillery, which is my beef with her."
Wow, I didn't get the memo! I haven't had any female gender attacks yet so I guess everyone thinks I'm a male lesbian.
Miffed;-)
That's cuz you're one of the good guys ;-)
Well, I am a Benedict Arnold to the Team Girl crowd and I do harbor a bit ( on the sub atomic level) of guilt not supporting Flak during her Pussy Riot crusades at times because she gets no support. So I've made a solemn promise to myself to fully defend her when she makes a valid point. This has become a long wait indeed.
Miffed;-)
Her synapses do occasionally come up with reasonable assertions on other topics.
So, you are unwilling to consider my questions? Does science not have implications and responsibilities?
The implied slur (believe it or not, I was not providing a slur) was not the point of my question, it merely asked for deliberation on the people whom drive and fund science and whether they could have an agenda.
As for scientific process, is not peer review an important part of the process? Does not peer review require access to base data? Why didn't Monsanto have to provide the raw date to the USDA for GMO approval? Consequently, how does scientific process protect us if it is so easily manipulated for corporate need?
Science is tool, neither good nor evil. It is all about how you use it...
Monsanto is not peer reviewed, but you can be damn sure that the techniques they used in the developement lab have been at one time....
Scientific funding from the corporate sector has always been stigmatized, especially when the research is directly related to corporate interests...
-----
Read up about this guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clair_Cameron_Patterson
and contrast him with this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Kehoe
Who do you think was on the up and up?
Thank you for proving my point. Now, how many Patterson's are there compared to Kehoe's?
Now, does science have the ability to do good works? Absolutely. Especially if left free to develop and pursue ideas and theories. Will it be allowed to? If history is a guide, probably not and then, it will depend on economics and profits.
I worry that science is used to justify the enslavement of mankind through faulty education (psychology), drugs, media brainwashing and conditioning, weapons development and various forms of pollution and genetic manipulation. So, a tool for good or evil? This is where responsibility comes in. You seem to want to avoid responsibility, as it is evident in your phrasing.
Clair Patterson appears to have been a good scientist and a responsible one as well. I fear there are a lot more kehoes in the world of science or at least in positions where they can effect outcomes.
There are a lot more Pattersons than Kehoes. And it is not even close.
But one Kehoe with Corporate backing is a very powerful creature...
Kehoes and their ilk do not remain long in academia for the simple reason the material gains are simply not there. And there is the root of your "Avoidance of Responsibility"...
What do you suggest to enforce accountability in dealing with the misuse of scientific knowledge or outright lies? And isn't that really the question?
While I doubt your assumption on the basis of history, I would like to think it is true. Still, your honesty and willingness to admit an evil exists is more than most people on this thread would ever do. I appreciate that.
I don't believe you can enforce accountability. Accountabilty is a part of our character and integrity, therefore it is part of the values we are instilled with. It goes to who we are and whom we wish to be. I dare say, present societal values, as they are expessed in school and media, fall far short in emulating these goals.
I guess it starts with me and you and our communities. Isn't that where it should start in the first place? Instead of the State? Personal responsibility is so very necessary to the health of civilization...
The "local community" has demonstrated time and time again that it is incapable of evaluating science in any reliable way...
Accountability has to do with people like Kehoe that made fortunes while knowingly denying that their product was poisoning people...
So, people are incapable of maintaining a healthy society without science? You really want to go with that idea?
As for accountability: what does your statement about Kehoe say or recommend? Should we prosecute scientists for the lies they collude in and propagate? Lengthy prison sentences and financial confiscation? Do murder charges apply? Careful now, the biggest killer of Americans is Iatrogenic illness.
http://www.sustainablemedicine.org/un-sustainable-medicine/death-by-medi...
Give it a break, I said no such thing...
Trying to pin down a committment, but you obviously don't feel strongly enough, is this why regulation fails?
Putting the 'almighty buck' ahead of everything is at the root of it..
What do you suggest to enforce accountability in dealing with the misuse of scientific knowledge or outright lies? And isn't that really the question?
--------------
just like with banksters...prosecute the fraud, dont whiitewash it and say nothing amiss here in east anglia, penn state, the bastion of integrity...
NASA should have fired Hansen the moment he became a cheerleader.
Does it bother you that both Canada and Australia have now begun unwinding and dumping their silly carbon schemes...
Drop the concern troll schtick, it really ain't your style...
9698, it's about revenue ass wipe. It would be an endless government crony revenue stream if they could pull it off. Taxing the air we exhale to pay these parasites to live off our hard earned wealth, what absolute insanity and it's always the people that pay the price.
I hope many here on Zerohedge are not dumb enough to buy into this looting bullshit!
Keep in mind, come the next couple of years pensions will go bust together with municipalities in many States, one after the other. While the government keeps on making stupid decisions, spending and creating more debt they never intend on paying back, they will increase taxes and fees creating less disposable income causing even more unemployment then there already is. With that will come looting what's left of IRA's, 401k's and any retirement account that government can suck from, for these leeches will come up with a 'law' to take them over. They're broke and believe me they will hunt down revenue worldwide as their doing with that dumb ass FATCA law, which is impairing liquidity for investment furthering fucking up the economy. Governments 'cetralized control' ALWAYS destroys the economy!
Keep in mind as welfare Statism grows and with it the Nation destroying bureaucracy they will be getting creative in 'law' to loot anyone and anything that breaths just like the global warming, tax the air humanity exhales CON.
Jefferson had it right....
"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."
-Thomas Jefferson
"Save your breath..."
Indeed, all of us should, lest some government leech demands payment when we get caught exhaling.
And to think Flak, you have been fueling their nonsense as the useful idiot your are (on this issue) helping them to loot your fellow countrymen!
And when you want to stop babbling parroted nonsense like the above we can all sit down and figure out the best way to deal with it...
Ah, parroting and to think I actually knew what I was talking about. God forbid anyone know more than you Flak. Believe me, just like the academics that are running Washington coming from the most prestigeous Universities in our land and the best they can do is bankrupt our great Nation.
What they don't know and are unwilling to admit is, they are dumb as a fence post when it comes to both economic and societal sense.
What I see in you is what I see in them, educated beyond their own intelligence not having a lick of common sense and having the inability to recognize the truth, even when it is staring you in the face.
You've been smokn' to much weed Flak, seems to have caused developmental arrest.
Flak, please google Composition of Air and look at CO2 and then look at the inert Argon. Then take a deep breath and exhale that evil, poisonous CO2 and THINK. Try it just once.
And pray tell what are the IR absorption properties of a monotomic inert gas like Ar?
And when you srop lying about your sexual gender, bitch, then maybe you will gain some credibility instead of being a misleading, lying cunt.
That is right, woman. You slipped up in your response to Col. Klink. It is difficult to maintain a lie.
Yes. Flak is a woman who is trying to pretend that she is a man. She is a Bull Dyke by definition.
You cannot fool me. I was raised by lesbians.
How about some Truth, Flak? For once?
It is about CREDIBILITY. It is about being taken seriously.
Are you going to go Oedipal on us?
It's seems to pointing in that direction....
No dear. But it does not change the fact that you are a woman.
But you are ashamed of that.
You fear not being taken seriously because you are a woman, but, the truth is that you are not taken seriously because of your DISHONESTY.
That is what is really sad.
So stop being a bitch.
Zzzz...
Stop being a bitch!
Stop it.
Look, I am not your mother or a surrogate...
Stop being a bitch.
Any scientist that goes along to go along, knowing that their dumb ass theory is fraud, through fear of being ostracized, has sold their soul both to the science community and the American people.
Climate McCarthyism claims yet another victimhttp://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/13/Climate-McCarthyism...
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230338000457952179140...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWsJcg-g1pg
When will you learn that science is not done in the Op-Ed pages...
You should read the referees reports
http://ioppublishing.org/newsDetails/statement-from-iop-publishing-on-st...
Why can't the Kochs and their ilk buy the requisite competency?
When will you learn that Warming has nothing to do with CO2 and Methane levels?
When will you learn that CO2 and Methane Atmospheric levels are CORRELATED with the use of Fossil Fuels, and that CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION?
When will you write the truth that this is a POLITICIZED TAX SCHEME which is being promoted to slow Human Economic activity, to dissuade the people from using Fossil Fuels, and to reap a financial windfall for Government?
When will you be honest about the agenda, woman?
Stop being a lying cunt.
Seeing anybody about those unresolved mother issues?
You should consider it...
Stop being a bitch.
Excerpt from your link Flakmeister:
"The IPCC process itself explains potential inconsistencies under the strict requirement of a simplistic energy balance: The different estimates for temperature, heat uptake, forcing, and ECS and TCR are made within different working groups, at slightly different points in time, and with potentially different emphasis on different data sources. The IPCC estimates of different quantities are not based on single data sources, nor on a fixed set of models, but by construction are expert based assessments based on a multitude of sources. Hence the expectation that all expert estimates are completely consistent within a simple energy balance model is unfunded from the beginning."
You lost me at IPCC the've lost all credibility and are, indeed as corrupt as an outfit can be.
IPCC too blinkered and corrupt to savehttp://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=55387187-4d06-446f-9f4f-c2397...
Excerpt:
"But Dr. Gray isn't an activist in the cause of enforcing the Kyoto Protocol and realizing the other goals of the worldwide IPCC process. To the contrary, Dr. Gray's mission, in his new role as cofounder of The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, is to stop the IPCC from spreading climate-change propaganda that undermines the integrity of science.
"The whole process is a swindle," he states, in large part because the IPCC has a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming.
" The Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) 1992 defined 'climate change' as changes in climate caused by human interference with atmospheric composition," he explains. "The task of the IPCC, therefore, has been to accumulate evidence to support this belief that all changes in the climate are caused by human interference with the atmosphere. Studies of natural climate change have largely been used to claim that these are negligible compared with 'climate change.' "
Yawn....
Tell them to submit it to another journal...
And I suppose the 99% of climate scientists who also believe in climate change are either in on the scam, or are deluded, or just plain stupid. The real scammers here are the conservatives and the oil and coal compaines who have convinced the sheeple of what is an obvious fact: global warming is real and it is man-made.
YC, make your scientific case and I'll check back later to see how you did...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PDC5s3VD7I
Climate Change is Real
However, human civilization is controlled by lies, backed by violence, which enforced frauds makes rationally responding to climate change practically impossible.
Although I like watching Mike Maloney's presentations, I would again point out my comments made previously here:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-11/end-us-economic-dominance-nails...
The End Of US Economic Dominance: Nails In The Dollar-Standard's CoffinNo need to repeat my comment on Maloney's views. But nevertheless, the most important point is that it is not possible to exaggerate the degree to which human civilization has become runaway criminal insanities, due to the multiplication of the facts that it is controlled by lies backed by violence, times that technologies have become many orders of magnitude more powerful.
Anyone who believes it is possible that we are going back to "money" as gold and silver is delusional, just as anybody who thinks human beings are going to respond to climate change coherently are delusional. The actual situation is that better science, based on rational evidence and logical arguments is IRRELEVANT, because the real world IS actually controlled by criminally insane enforced frauds, and that is going to get unimaginably worse in the foreseeable future.
Sane Mary Jane...
Please don't use the USA in the same breath with human civilization. This fast freight has been diverted down a dirt road. The cannibals in Borneo are more civilized, anyway they end up with human mad cow so at least it's self regulating. The govt. cheese is more destructive.
For the time being, the American Dollar still dominates the global economy, and thus, the globalized political economy, which IS the "civilization."
The point of many of Maloney's videos is that those days appear numbered, and therefore, more and more, your point is correct that America is no longer as dominate in the global system as it once was. As you suggest, and Maloney appears to be saying, the American "fast freight has been diverted down a dirt road" by the international banksters, in order to deliberately cause what is left of the American democratic republic to finish going through its train wreck.
flak has managed to prove his ignorance extends to historical and financial matters as well as global warming.
The Koch's are sneaking flouride into his raisin bran.
How different it would have all been had the Japs had the presence of mind to listen to Yamamoto about rousing a sleeping giant and FDR had died of an aneurism at 30 ... and we'd stayed on the gold standard.
Or if someone invented a time machine and went back and bought a few of Hitlers paintings....
Don't tell me you still believe Hitler killed 6 million people because he was pissed about his failed painting career? Think about which tribe had their hands on the world's monetary levers since 1917 and hence the wherewithall to derail Hitler's ambitions. Then tell me it was just about unsold paintings.
The post was clearly far too subtle or oblique for your grasp...
What could go wrong?
Whatever that new monetary system is, it won't be based on gold....
Well maybe a small fraction of it will...
I doubt that scarcity will ever again be a solution... Our fearless leaders will chose death and destruction to create a new abundance. Equilibrium between supply and demand...
Once the government crosses the line of public confidence, due to the idea they think they can control the economy and society, all bets are off. What we will eventually see is one crisis after another crisis, more looting, more government corruption and confiscation of wealth, then collapse. It's always collapse in public confidence then civil unrest! One only take a look at socialism worldwide, it always, throughout history, produces economic destruction.
Your right, money, even if it's paper is always based on confidence! In our case it's U.S. dollar government backing, once the public confidence level in government starts going south, it generally doesn't end well.
It ain't inflation that will destroy public confidence but deflation for all great empires have died by deflation!
Just another simple case of overextension of debt. Dropping prices in fiat sets fire to the nest, theirs, not ours. Inflation hurts savers, workers, retirees, and the middle class.
Deflation hurts governments. Why are we lemmings following this shit over the cliff?
gold schmold, try putting gold in your gas tank and see how far you get. Its ridiculous to say in one breathe that most (if not all) of the wars for the last 100 hundred years have centered around oil, then turn around and say yeah but everyone wants gold. Bullcrap, if they wanted gold, they would be fighting over gold.
OK OK OK...
Gold and Oil.
There
Isnt it always the cry of the gold bugs that there is no gold in reserves? Isnt that why we are all hording gold and screaming for an audit? Fine... I agree no gold in the reserves or what is there is all tugsten. OK
Does anyone question the validity of the US oil reserves? no. WHY? Because gold with out oil just means you get to look at your shiny metal until the tanks from the country that have oil roll up and take it from you.
You can bet your butt the oil is there, because it is to important for it not to be there. Gold eh.. We can fake it.
Ironically, it was oil that nullified the concept of scarcity that gold had once provided.
What is even more ironic is the fact that governments and their mouthpieces are still able to nullify the concept of scarcity by saying that there is, "plenty of oil". and the past 150 years of lower left to upper right on the chart of oil production will forever be extrapolated into the future.
So lets review
1. Oil is in limited supply, so is gold
2. The amount of oil decreases everyday, the amount of gold remains the same
3. the world society is 100% dependant on oil, people lock gold up in their safes to make them feel secure.
Simple supply and demand logic would tell me oil is the better bet, yet, Im suppossed to believe that GOLD is the best thing since sliced bread? For why for what? What is it going to be used for. What VALUE does it posses that makes it different from a piece of paper with a picture of a dead president on it. Gold is worth something because people think it is worth something just like all other "money". Oil has value, oil does work. Oil get you from point A to point B. Oil keeps you warn, and makes it so that world can eat.
By the time the world returns from the chaos we are heading into and is ready to set itself up a new monetary system(even if it is gold), chances are good we will have long been shot/starved to death staring at it.
hmmm...idealogical analysis,,,but after all, I have to live in the real world and it is very difficult for me to invest in physical oil.
I can't save oil as it isn't minted into coins that are globally redeemable without governments ability to quantitatively ease their value at their discretion.