Natural Order - Latest Comments

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

USB 3G — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:55:34 -0000

Oh yes, this is what I've been waiting for. Thanks for the help! I hope you will post exciting imformation more.

Re: Mountain Lion Party, Table for Eight

USB 3G — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 04:12:05 -0000

Oh nice, thanks for your
information!

Re: Deceptive Intuition

Intuition in business — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:55:07 -0000

Intuition is like our inner guidance system or a GPS. We all
possess intuition. We didn't exactly come into this life with a set of
operating instructions, however we do have an inner road map. Each time we have
a 'feeling', or what I call a 'knowing,' it's a signal that we are on the right
road and headed in the right direction.

Re: All Good Things…..

Karon Odriscoll — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 02:32:32 -0000

Great post, I concur completely and appreciate the time you took to write it. Cheers!

Re: Look What the Cat Dragged In

TEA — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:21:00 -0000

Someone has forgotten the plague in Europe! Rodent control is a good thing! Also, it is much better that a cat kill rodents and insects, rather than toxic pesticide... Although, I do agree spay and neutering ferrel and domestic cats is necessary. Regarding birds, point well taken... However, careless humans kill far mor birds than cats, with the use of pesticide, cars; toxic products used everday, pollution and degradation of the environment.

Re: The Blue Marble In Motion

Josephine Cortez — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 04:03:02 -0000

Thank you for taking the time to talk about this, I feel strongly about this and I take pleasure in researching this topic.

Re: All Good Things…..

I larrd — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 07:11:56 -0000

Adios. Thanks for the info. Enjoyed the jousting. Hope you're not involved in the GW polar bear fudging scandal or something.

Re: Fossil Fuel Problems…..Solved!

I larrd — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 12:17:34 -0000

Look what those dummies at Fox News are up to now. They think fudging the data isn't scientific at all. Ignoramuses:

Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for 'Adjusted' Sea-Level Data
Is climate change raising sea levels, as Al Gore has argued -- or are climate scientists doctoring the data?

The University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters -- or about the thickness of a fingernail -- every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, sparking criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.
"Gatekeepers of our sea level data are manufacturing a fictitious sea level rise that is not occurring," said James M. Taylor, a lawyer who focuses on environmental issues for the Heartland Institute.
Steve Nerem, the director of the widely relied-upon research center, told FoxNews.com that his group added the 0.3 millimeters per year to the actual sea level measurements because land masses, still
rebounding from the ice age, are rising and increasing the amount of water that oceans can hold.
"We have to account for the fact that the ocean basins are actually getting slightly bigger... water volume is expanding," he said, a phenomenon they call glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA).

Taylor calls it tomfoolery.

"There really is no reason to do this other than to advance a political agenda," he said.

Climate scientist John Christy, a professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, said that the amount of water in the ocean and sea level were two different things.

"To me… sea level rise is what's measured against the actual coast," he told FoxNews.com. "That's what tells us the impact of rising oceans."

Taylor agreed.

"Many global warming alarmists say that vast stretches of coastline are going to be swallowed up by the sea. Well, that means we should be talking about sea level, not about global water volume."

In e-mails with FoxNews.com, Nerem indicated that he considered "sea level rise" to be the same thing as the amount of water in the ocean.

"If we correct our data to remove [the effect of rising land], it actually does cause the rate of sea level (a.k.a. ocean water volume change) rise to be bigger," Nerem wrote. The adjustment is trivial, and not worth public attention, he added.

"For the layperson, this correction is a non-issue and certainly not newsworthy… [The] effect is tiny -- only 1 inch over 100 years, whereas we expect sea level to rise 2-4 feet."

But Taylor said that the correction seemed bigger when compared with actual sea level increases.

"We’ve seen only 7 inches of sea level rise in the past century and it hasn’t sped up this century. Compared to that, this would add nearly 20 percent to the sea level rise. That's not insignificant," he told FoxNews.com.

Nerem said that the research center is considering compromising on the adjustment.

"We are considering putting both data sets on our website -- a GIA-corrected dataset, as well as one without the GIA correction," he said.

Christy said that would be a welcome change.

"I would encourage CU to put the sea level rate [with] no adjustment at the top of the website," he said.

Taylor’s takeaway: Be wary of sea level rise estimates.

"When Al Gore talks about Manhattan flooding this century, and 20 feet of sea level rise, that’s simply not going to happen. If it were going to happen, he wouldn’t have bought his multi-million dollar mansion along the coast in California."

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

I larrd — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:01:02 -0000

In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding
terribly to the toll of famine victims .... record rains in
parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst flooding
in centuries. In Canada's wheat belt, a particularly chilly and rainy
spring has delayed planting and may well bring a disappointingly small
harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has suffered from
uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A series of unusually
cold winters has gripped the American Far West, while New England and
northern Europe have recently experienced the mildest winters within
anyone's recollection.

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past
several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect
that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are
actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather
varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take
an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the
atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three
decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing.
Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for
the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of
another ice age.

Telltale signs are everywhere — from the unexpected persistence and
thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward
migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the
Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F.
Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other
convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of Columbia
University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his wife Helena
analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern Hemisphere, they found
that the area of the ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12%
in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since. Areas of Baffin
Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example, were once totally free of
any snow in summer; now they are covered year round. ...

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The
University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists
suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a
result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more
sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth. ...

University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former
president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the
continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave
the world a grim premonition of what might happen. Warns Hare:
"I don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable
if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/ma...

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

I larrd — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:09:21 -0000

It's not amazing at all to get academics to agree on something. The first cartoon sums it up quite well, really. Hilarious.

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

I larrd — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:07:46 -0000

Hold the phone!

Mini Ice Age!

http://www.skynews.com.au/e...

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

G.A. Smith — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 22:49:28 -0000

Sorry, field research season has me running. Good example. But it was independent lines of evidence (comparison of rock strata and fossils between the two coasts, for example) that moved that observation from coincidence to fact.

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

G.A. Smith — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 22:47:49 -0000

Sorry, field research season has me running. Funny cartoons, especially the second one. Does every consensus imply a conspiracy? What then allows us to distinguish consensus from conspiracy? Many times we might scream conspiracy without actually realizing what an amazing undertaking it would be to pull such a thing off (like getting academics to agree on something!). However, sometimes there really are conspiracies. I would suggest the difference is evidence...an honest evaluation of evidence at least.

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

NEFryy — Tue, 31 May 2011 07:41:42 -0000

Some of these guys do take very long leaps to get from one point to the next. On the other hand, In Tony Hillerman's fictional series Joe Leaphorn of the Navajo Tribal Police keeps saying he doesn't believe in coincidences. There was a time when the mirror similarity of East Coast America and West Coat Africa was a mere coincidence.

Re: Conspiracy Theories, The Cartoon

I larrd — Fri, 27 May 2011 14:27:33 -0000

Funny. That last cell led me to realize you could do a good one on "How to build a consensus," as well. Use some sort of Al Gore-like cartoonish character doing powerpoint, throw in some "hide the declines," blackballing, maybe some government financial incentives and big corporate interests, then have the nutjob start demonizing anyone who questions. Hilarity ensues.

http://images51.fotki.com/v...

Or there's this from Bok:

http://www.bokbluster.com/w...

Re: Eugenie Scott Debunks Bigfoot

NEFryy — Mon, 23 May 2011 15:47:54 -0000

Oh I don't think I'd go that far.

Re: Eugenie Scott Debunks Bigfoot

G.A. Smith — Mon, 23 May 2011 10:04:43 -0000

I'm with you. I have always been a fan of monsters even though I realize they are a myth. It seems the only "monsters" that truly exist are inside our own heads.

Re: Eugenie Scott Debunks Bigfoot

NEFryy — Sun, 22 May 2011 13:48:55 -0000

Here's another tale of the wonder years: A few years later in that same
neighborhood, I ran around with several boys, one of whom had a kid sister, who
absent other little girls to play with sometimes followed us around. OK
sometimes, but not always, like if we had got hold of some cigarettes with which
to practice being adults. One day when Lil' Sis wanted to go with us and we
didn't want her along just then, I remembered Sinbad and told her there were
rumors of a large predatory bird that had been seen swooping down and carrying
off small children. One of us stepped back behind th rest and made a purported
bird call: "Wheep , wa Wheeeep!"

"Oh my gosh! That sounds like it now!, You better go home Sis!"

Her eyes got big and round, but she hung right with us.

From behind a tree: "Wheep , wa Wheeeep!"

"There it is again! Aren't you going home?"

And a couple more times, but she hung right in there.

Finally I looked around to see who made that last tweet, and - wouldn't you know
it; it was Lil' Sis.

The moral of the first story is that we want our lives to be more exciting than
say, watching a cross-country race.

The moral to the second is probably that the behaviorally modern human is great
at playing games; to include figuring out the rules of any new game; or perhaps
more simple, we are a naturally mischevious species.

I believe that there are stories BY people who made phony Bigfoot tracks and
crop circles to the effect that when they finally fessed up, there were many who
simply would not accept it.

For the record, I still hope and pray that somewhere there is a bigfoot, and a
Nessie, and ruins of a large ship on Mt. Ararat, and a throwback brontosaurus in
the Beldian Congo, and I wouldn't mind at all if there were a triceratops
somewhere out there.

________________________________

Re: Eugenie Scott Debunks Bigfoot

G.A. Smith — Sun, 22 May 2011 12:44:57 -0000

Great story and a perfect example of the wonder of a child vs. the reality of evidence. There is nothing wrong with wonder and amazement, but it can lead us astray. Some adults have never let go of their overactive imaginations. Thanks for sharing!

Re: Eugenie Scott Debunks Bigfoot

NEFryy — Sun, 22 May 2011 11:22:26 -0000

How terribly disappointing to hear! But I'm used to it by now. In December 1940, the National Geographic had an article about dinosaurs. No computer animations or such; just artists drwings of imagined appearance, along with pictures of bones, assembled and in situ . My Dad explained all about them to me. The next summer at Springfield Lake near where we lived, one of those fast moving and violent summer storms came crashing through; here and gone in about 20 minutes. After it had passed, I and my friend Les, went down to the lake shore and walked along it. The Storm was off to the Southeast, still lighting up the sky, and flying clouds passed over the moon's face allowing it to shine
plenty of light down on the roughened waters. A very magical night as I recall. Then we say SOMETHING moving along out in the water, maybe fifty or so yards from shore. A giant horned head of some monstrous creature was bobbing along. We figured the water was over our heads at that distance and the hair on our necks went prickly. I remembered the Nat Geo and said, " I know what it is! It's a Triceratops! It seemed to have three horns pointing alternately forqward and skyward. After watching it pass on to the West we ran home and I told my Dad about.

"No, it's not because they've all been gone for millions of years. It's most [probably a clump of cat-tail roots with some stalks standing up that way. The wind is blowing it toward 'the bat' and the rough water makes it look like an animal-like gait." I was crushed, but the next morning we got a rowboat and rowed into the bay and sure enough, therews a clump of cat-tail roots with three stalks standing up. It was a worthwhile lesson.

But, you know, I really really did want it to be a triceratops.

Re: Lost and Found

G.A. Smith — Thu, 19 May 2011 11:04:48 -0000

Great questions. The short answer is, we are not as different as we seem; animals appear similar because we are related. All animals are working from the same template. Even though dinosaurs are extinct, much of their DNA is still around, in birds especially (which are flying dinosaurs), but also all other vertebrates including humans. So the template for horns in dinosaurs is still present and available for horns in a gazelle. (Dinosaurs and mammals share a common reptilian ancestor.) That's not to say that the amino acid sequences are exactly the same, but there is some conservation of structure. The fact that we can take snippets of DNA from a mouse and place it in a bacterium, or vice versa, and it functions properly provides evidence for this complementarity. As for external features like heads and eyes, our observations of the natural world are biased by what we are most familiar with. In fact there is myriad form and function in nature. Most animals do not have two eyes, they have compound eyes. This is the insect condition. But once we see the formation of a head in our ancestors, and the first indications of eye-like structures, there were two of them. It seems that two is better than one (direction and distance information) but three is no better than two (extra cost to maintain). So all animals after that early ancestor retained this feature. Finally, keep in mind that the raw materials of evolution often arise by chance (mutations, for example) but the process of natural selection is most assuredly not random. What works and enables the production of more offspring stays, what doesn't is eventually lost.

Re: Lost and Found

I larrd — Thu, 19 May 2011 05:59:09 -0000

Speaking of extinct species, I notice on Dinosaur Train that Dr. Scott the Paleontologist often explains how scientists surmise things about dinosaur features by observing animals that are currently living among us -- the horns on such and such a dinosaur may have been more for show than fighting, because we see the same thing in some African animal today, etc.

This raises a couple questions in my mind regarding extinct species and commonalities among species. Assuming dinosaur DNA became extinct when the dinosaurs disappeared, what are the odds that current large species would develop such similar characteristics, for such similar purposes? If it's all about chance, couldn't nature find a large number of alternative ways for large animals to adapt? Of course that goes for cross-species characteristics in general--why do fish, octopi, shrimp, humans, etc., all tend to have so many common characteristics (two eyes, a head, legs, etc.). The world is a diverse and wondrous place, but it seems to me that lifeforms could have been even more diverse.

Re: The Vatican Urges Action on Climate Change

I larrd — Thu, 19 May 2011 05:45:24 -0000

Big pies attract a lot more flies, that's for sure!

Re: The Vatican Urges Action on Climate Change

G.A. Smith — Mon, 16 May 2011 13:16:35 -0000

Yes, evidence does look nice when graphed. I just wish grants were as easy to get as Evans makes it sound. Rejection rates for the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health are at record highs, even for climate work.

Re: The Vatican Urges Action on Climate Change

I larrd — Mon, 16 May 2011 12:58:24 -0000

Judging from the comments, it seems this Evans fellow has rattled some cages with his article. Impressive number of charts in the rebuttal piece.

Sometimes kickbacks are also called "grants," "chairs" or "tenure."