|
TPTB_need_war
|
 |
September 27, 2015, 08:28:04 AM
Last edit: September 27, 2015, 08:44:28 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
klee, Armstrong may be that good. He said he had an algorithm on his machine copy that destroyed itself (overwrote its own data 7 times) when it detected it was being tampered with. But yeah that one is hard to fathom. Nevertheless if he spent $0.1 - 1billion on data (as he claims inflation adjusted) and had even audio tapes of many of the NY Club market manipulations (which I've seen an official SEC letter confirming these tapes were conveniently destroyed when the twin towers fell on 9/11). Given the fees he was raking in from advising corporations with his model, one might assume he spent a lot on security. In that case, yes I think one could make it very difficult for the NSA. Give me $10 million and 5 - 10 year period to have prepared over time to spend on security, and I could probably make it impractical for the NSA to intercept my work. Nevertheless it is still difficult to fathom, because you need subcontractors and they can be infiltrated. Armstrong is one really strange or unique man that stands out from all others in our era. This man claims he was the hedge fund manager for the Japanese postal retirement fund in the $trillion range back in the 1980s! Apparently that was more than the USA national debt which is what I think he wrote (haven't double checked that). About your M.S., I will have a reply in the Economic Totalitarianism thread... in one word why the hell are you (we) not drinking Yakult! (well it was here all time in front of my face in every grocery store here and I ignored it for 3 years because it looked like a local product to me and was so sweet and I thought it was nonsense). Something significant happened to me yesterday. I will explain... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9881885https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22132181https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21143526https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17944834https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12562457https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactobacillus_caseiLactobacillus casei is a species of genus Lactobacillus found in the human intestine and mouth. This particular species of Lactobacillus is documented to have a wide pH and temperature range, and complements the growth of L. acidophilus, a producer of the enzyme amylase (a carbohydrate-digesting enzyme). http://www.yakultusa.com/#faqIs Yakult a yogurt drink?
No. Yakult is a fermented dairy drink that contains probiotic cultures rather than yogurt cultures. The main difference between yogurt and probiotic cultures is that probiotics must have scientifically proven health benefits while yogurts do not. Another point of distinction is the type of cultures; probiotics are typically various species and strains of lactobacilli or bifidobacteria, while yogurt starter cultures are specifically Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus, according to the National Yogurt Association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to be a moderator, report many posts with accuracy. You will be noticed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
macsga
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002
Strange, yet attractive.
|
|
September 27, 2015, 09:12:54 AM |
|
Armstrong is one really strange or unique man that stands out from all others in our era. This man claims he was the hedge fund manager for the Japanese postal retirement fund in the $trillion range back in the 1980s! Apparently that was more than the USA national debt which is what I think he wrote (haven't double checked that).
Even I have expressed my doubts, I cannot rule out that he found what he claims for. Unfortunately for me, this can only be proven via the usual method: Just wait and see what happens. In any case, the story is a bit weird if you're a sceptic, and know a bit more than basics of forensics data recovery. For instance, I've seen a hard disk giving up its data after a fire, and with some part of it destroyed (!). Never thought it was possible, but there's cognitive techniques that may "guess" what's there even if it's not. I also don't rule out he's a practical genius. Like "adding everyone's mind here together to match his", genius. On the other hand, maybe he just got lucky enough to put some random puzzle pieces into the right order and was just smart enough to see the big picture. Works that way too. In any case, if I was in his place, I'd definitely go for bigger things. Money (the field he was onto up for 3 decades) tends to change. I'm very curious to see if he "sees" the (possible) upcoming change to crypto. He just seems to ignore the basics here. Or he just gets old and stubborn... like me and you.  Edit: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/24/permanent-qe-theory-gaining-backers.htmlAfter all, (at least) one of us could be right... (or wrong)! |
Chaos could be a form of intelligence we cannot yet understand its complexity.
|
|
|
klee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 27, 2015, 10:36:59 AM
Last edit: September 27, 2015, 11:11:25 AM by klee |
|
klee, Armstrong may be that good. He said he had an algorithm on his machine copy that destroyed itself (overwrote its own data 7 times) when it detected it was being tampered with. But yeah that one is hard to fathom. Nevertheless if he spent $0.1 - 1billion on data (as he claims inflation adjusted) and had even audio tapes of many of the NY Club market manipulations (which I've seen an official SEC letter confirming these tapes were conveniently destroyed when the twin towers fell on 9/11). Given the fees he was raking in from advising corporations with his model, one might assume he spent a lot on security. In that case, yes I think one could make it very difficult for the NSA. Give me $10 million and 5 - 10 year period to have prepared over time to spend on security, and I could probably make it impractical for the NSA to intercept my work. Nevertheless it is still difficult to fathom, because you need subcontractors and they can be infiltrated. Armstrong is one really strange or unique man that stands out from all others in our era. This man claims he was the hedge fund manager for the Japanese postal retirement fund in the $trillion range back in the 1980s! Apparently that was more than the USA national debt which is what I think he wrote (haven't double checked that). About your M.S., I will have a reply in the Economic Totalitarianism thread... in one word why the hell are you (we) not drinking Yakult! (well it was here all time in front of my face in every grocery store here and I ignored it for 3 years because it looked like a local product to me and was so sweet and I thought it was nonsense). Something significant happened to me yesterday. I will explain... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9881885https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22132181https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21143526https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17944834https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12562457https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactobacillus_caseiLactobacillus casei is a species of genus Lactobacillus found in the human intestine and mouth. This particular species of Lactobacillus is documented to have a wide pH and temperature range, and complements the growth of L. acidophilus, a producer of the enzyme amylase (a carbohydrate-digesting enzyme). http://www.yakultusa.com/#faqIs Yakult a yogurt drink?
No. Yakult is a fermented dairy drink that contains probiotic cultures rather than yogurt cultures. The main difference between yogurt and probiotic cultures is that probiotics must have scientifically proven health benefits while yogurts do not. Another point of distinction is the type of cultures; probiotics are typically various species and strains of lactobacilli or bifidobacteria, while yogurt starter cultures are specifically Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus, according to the National Yogurt Association. If this is the same as Kefir then I have cultivated mine in the past. Dropped it because I was not 100% sure it was paleo compliant and don't have much time for new research atm. In the future I plan to do 2 experiments, one with eggs and the other with kefir again to see if I have any strange reactions. But now I can't focus on experimenting with my protocols because I try to build my AI engine in R for trading. I hate programming... |
|
|
|
|
|
suda123
|
|
September 27, 2015, 10:54:03 AM |
|
Why do I always write about something Armstrong will write about a couple of days before he does. Remember I mentioned Texas is like its own country and the Texans are very proud and also that the USA will likely break up into factions: http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/37467I see now, probably why the federal reserve in newyork and the riot servers for the most popular online game both moved there servers,establishments to chicago, the US is probably going to seperate super poor countrys in seperated states and middle class etc. |
|
|
|
|
hdbuck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
|
September 27, 2015, 12:30:35 PM |
|
bitcoin's killer app is the looming financial crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1852
|
|
September 27, 2015, 04:50:31 PM |
|
We've talked about buying land. I think it's also important to talk about the risk of having your wealth in such a public, immovable asset. If governments are hungry for tax revenues, then owning property with lots of equity in it might be a big bullseye on your head. The deflation comes from the rise in the cost of government, in addition to the collapse in leverage. As governments with power turn to extracting more from the people, rather than from the weak government, you get massive deflation and never hyperinflation. As was the case with the revolutionary new government in Germany during the 1920s. Their own power leads them down the path of suicide. Of course, that can migrate to full economic totalitarianism akin to communism. Whether you technically own your home and are taxed twice its value, or if the state owns it and allows you to live there, is just a technical point. The bottom-line is both are deflationary – not inflationary. So you might buy a house for $12,000 and the government ends up taxing you $12,000 or $24,000 every year. Fair point; that's why we must consider options other than the western civilization. Africa? South America? or Antarctica? Penguins seem like nice guys to talk to...  macsga I would advise to only invest in S America if you already have plenty of money, and you need diversification. Managing property is not all that easy. You need people there you can trust (consider any country where you have trusted relatives or, maybe, friends). And property could be taxed highly there as well. Africa? Forget it IMO. Asia might be a possibility... Nice beach-front property in Vietnam (if legal) or the Philippines (ask TPTB) might work. All those rich Chinese are going to need vacation rentals. Bold part. I disagree. Mostly because i feel you're clustering of all 54 african countries and different economic regions misinforms your judgement. There are opportunities in Africa - LOTS! if you can take off your tinted glasses. Sub Saharan Africa, East Africa for instance. Afrikoin Fair enough. I would be a NEWBIE in Africa. No contacts, no language skills, not much to offer the locals. Contacts are very important in places like Africa, where it is difficult to do business. A foreigner like me trying to set up shop with a small business knowing nothing about any of the countries..., ah very difficult. South America works better for me. It already has, we have a nice business in Peru. |
|
|
|
|
|
jehst
|
|
September 27, 2015, 06:22:33 PM
Last edit: September 27, 2015, 06:33:44 PM by jehst |
|
Armstrong has talked a lot about how we are moving towards "one world currency" against which every nation's currency will float. I'm having a very hard time seeing how this would work politically. If Britain refused to join the Eurozone, then why wouldn't we expect at least a few major nations to refuse any sort of "one world currency"? Is there anywhere that he talks indepth about the one world currency that he's envisioning? I don't see it. An agreed upon one-world RESERVE currency would perhaps be a basket. I too am concerned who would be in control. I can say that the IMF is posturing already for that position. There will be the installation of corruption if the the IMF takes control. This is not my personal CHOICE. This is not about my OPINION, it is simply what is unfolding. I am certainly no fan of the IMF.
Nevertheless, the Free Markets would still prevail for each country’s currency would then float against the reserve. This would be the political solution for the major countries could then agree. The problem when one nation’s currency becomes the default world reserve currency (Babylon, Athens, Rome, Britain, Spain, France, USA, etc..), their domestic policy objectives become forced upon the world.
Just as the USA is scared to death of deflation as in the Great Depression and immediately stimulates, the Germans are obsessed with the hyperinflation of the 1920s and keep subjecting themselves and the rest of Europe to austerity (deflation) even at the expense of 60%+ unemployment. Both fight the FREE MARKETS to their own self-destruction. You can die from extreme cold as well as heat. The answer lies in between – never at the extremes of either philosophy.
We are headed into the vortex of fiscal mismanagement. The outcome will be the solution of creating a one-world currency for p http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/27961The answer literally just cuts off there. A basket of what? Currencies? Commodities? Both? Will you actually be able to redeem this new reserve currency for the things that the IMF says they represent? How would we know that the IMF is managing this currency properly? if people lose confidence in the IMF, won't they just revert to using a national currency as the de facto world currency? Very very skeptical of this idea. |
Year 2021
Bitcoin Supply: ~90% mined
Supply Inflation: <1.8%
|
|
|
|
altcoinUK
|
|
September 28, 2015, 12:30:55 AM
Last edit: September 28, 2015, 12:58:33 AM by altcoinUK |
|
Armstrong has talked a lot about how we are moving towards "one world currency" against which every nation's currency will float. I'm having a very hard time seeing how this would work politically. If Britain refused to join the Eurozone, then why wouldn't we expect at least a few major nations to refuse any sort of "one world currency"? Is there anywhere that he talks indepth about the one world currency that he's envisioning? I don't see it. An agreed upon one-world RESERVE currency would perhaps be a basket. I too am concerned who would be in control. I can say that the IMF is posturing already for that position. There will be the installation of corruption if the the IMF takes control. This is not my personal CHOICE. This is not about my OPINION, it is simply what is unfolding. I am certainly no fan of the IMF.
Nevertheless, the Free Markets would still prevail for each country’s currency would then float against the reserve. This would be the political solution for the major countries could then agree. The problem when one nation’s currency becomes the default world reserve currency (Babylon, Athens, Rome, Britain, Spain, France, USA, etc..), their domestic policy objectives become forced upon the world.
Just as the USA is scared to death of deflation as in the Great Depression and immediately stimulates, the Germans are obsessed with the hyperinflation of the 1920s and keep subjecting themselves and the rest of Europe to austerity (deflation) even at the expense of 60%+ unemployment. Both fight the FREE MARKETS to their own self-destruction. You can die from extreme cold as well as heat. The answer lies in between – never at the extremes of either philosophy.
We are headed into the vortex of fiscal mismanagement. The outcome will be the solution of creating a one-world currency for p http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/27961The answer literally just cuts off there. A basket of what? Currencies? Commodities? Both? Will you actually be able to redeem this new reserve currency for the things that the IMF says they represent? How would we know that the IMF is managing this currency properly? if people lose confidence in the IMF, won't they just revert to using a national currency as the de facto world currency? Very very skeptical of this idea. The politicians who support such nonsenses like the quantitative easing and keep kicking the can down the road to avoid facing with the crisis, will sign up to any solutions to keep the corrupted financial system in place. I have no doubt they will implement the electronic only money and the one-world currency to have the most effective framework to collect taxes. |
|
|
|
|
tabnloz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 961
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 28, 2015, 12:48:55 AM |
|
Armstrong has talked a lot about how we are moving towards "one world currency" against which every nation's currency will float. I'm having a very hard time seeing how this would work politically. If Britain refused to join the Eurozone, then why wouldn't we expect at least a few major nations to refuse any sort of "one world currency"? Is there anywhere that he talks indepth about the one world currency that he's envisioning? I don't see it. An agreed upon one-world RESERVE currency would perhaps be a basket. I too am concerned who would be in control. I can say that the IMF is posturing already for that position. There will be the installation of corruption if the the IMF takes control. This is not my personal CHOICE. This is not about my OPINION, it is simply what is unfolding. I am certainly no fan of the IMF.
Nevertheless, the Free Markets would still prevail for each country’s currency would then float against the reserve. This would be the political solution for the major countries could then agree. The problem when one nation’s currency becomes the default world reserve currency (Babylon, Athens, Rome, Britain, Spain, France, USA, etc..), their domestic policy objectives become forced upon the world.
Just as the USA is scared to death of deflation as in the Great Depression and immediately stimulates, the Germans are obsessed with the hyperinflation of the 1920s and keep subjecting themselves and the rest of Europe to austerity (deflation) even at the expense of 60%+ unemployment. Both fight the FREE MARKETS to their own self-destruction. You can die from extreme cold as well as heat. The answer lies in between – never at the extremes of either philosophy.
We are headed into the vortex of fiscal mismanagement. The outcome will be the solution of creating a one-world currency for p http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/27961The answer literally just cuts off there. A basket of what? Currencies? Commodities? Both? Will you actually be able to redeem this new reserve currency for the things that the IMF says they represent? How would we know that the IMF is managing this currency properly? if people lose confidence in the IMF, won't they just revert to using a national currency as the de facto world currency? Very very skeptical of this idea. If the IMF are running everything then the currency would have to be the SDR. The IMF is the only organisation left that has a 'clean' balance sheet, as all governments have transferred the private debts of the financial institutions to the public balance sheet. So, when SHTF in the next crisis, the SDR will be there to facilitate trade / debts between governments (but will not replace national currencies day to day). there is a school of thought that says the US & IMF are trying to enact an orderly change of reserve currency, ie a monetary reset ala Bretton Woods. The US accepts the dollar is on the way out and is allowing readjustment of the SDR basket. Each nation therefore needs to have a similar % backing of gold to GDP and needs to play by the rules of 'the club'. China has been doing this (playing nice) however recently the decision to include the Yuan in the SDR basket was delayed by a year - the next week the Yuan devalued. During a time when China faces a number of structural difficulties at home, this may have been to give themselves room to appreciate via peg as the USD strengthens or it's an FU to the IMF and they'll go back to playing nice. And it is a good point regarding cash (below). The trend towards non acceptance of cash is accelerating so if SHTF and we go NIRP, no one will have recourse to physically redeem their money. This would both stop a bank run in a crisis and enable governments to tax at whatever rate they want. |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
September 28, 2015, 05:55:45 AM |
|
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11692 So forgive me, but the pound could fall to the 65 to 70 US cent area at the worse case scenario byafter 2015. I know that sounds off-the-wall and it is about a 50% fall. But drastic movements are necessary to force drastic political change.
...
When we look at the timing array you can see the 2015/2016 turning point. Now look at the volatility coming after that target. It is going nuts on top of the Panic Cycles in 2016 and 2021. Look at the Directional Changes starting in 2014. This is warning of unbelievable confusion and tremendous oscillations that will break the backs of men and put on trial the philosophies of decades.
|
|
|
|
klee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 28, 2015, 06:49:57 AM |
|
We've talked about buying land. I think it's also important to talk about the risk of having your wealth in such a public, immovable asset. If governments are hungry for tax revenues, then owning property with lots of equity in it might be a big bullseye on your head. The deflation comes from the rise in the cost of government, in addition to the collapse in leverage. As governments with power turn to extracting more from the people, rather than from the weak government, you get massive deflation and never hyperinflation. As was the case with the revolutionary new government in Germany during the 1920s. Their own power leads them down the path of suicide. Of course, that can migrate to full economic totalitarianism akin to communism. Whether you technically own your home and are taxed twice its value, or if the state owns it and allows you to live there, is just a technical point. The bottom-line is both are deflationary – not inflationary. So you might buy a house for $12,000 and the government ends up taxing you $12,000 or $24,000 every year. Fair point; that's why we must consider options other than the western civilization. Africa? South America? or Antarctica? Penguins seem like nice guys to talk to... macsga I would advise to only invest in S America if you already have plenty of money, and you need diversification. Managing property is not all that easy. You need people there you can trust (consider any country where you have trusted relatives or, maybe, friends). And property could be taxed highly there as well. Africa? Forget it IMO. Asia might be a possibility... Nice beach-front property in Vietnam (if legal) or the Philippines (ask TPTB) might work. All those rich Chinese are going to need vacation rentals. Bold part. I disagree. Mostly because i feel you're clustering of all 54 african countries and different economic regions misinforms your judgement. There are opportunities in Africa - LOTS! if you can take off your tinted glasses. Sub Saharan Africa, East Africa for instance. Afrikoin Fair enough. I would be a NEWBIE in Africa. No contacts, no language skills, not much to offer the locals. Contacts are very important in places like Africa, where it is difficult to do business. A foreigner like me trying to set up shop with a small business knowing nothing about any of the countries..., ah very difficult. South America works better for me. It already has, we have a nice business in Peru. No way Africa - Islamofascists everywhere.... |
|
|
|
|
CoinCube
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
|
September 28, 2015, 07:09:48 AM |
|
Recently there has been debate about a global warming pause. Apparently the temperature data both land based and satellite data have shown little global warming since 1998. There have been many attempts to explain this pause including theories about volcanic eruption and the oceans absorbing more heat. This year there was an article in the Journal of Science arguing that there was no pause in global warming and that the data once "adjusted" revealed the previously hidden warming trend. A chart summarizing the papers conclusions. US scientists: Global warming pause 'no longer valid' Now science is one of the most selective scientific journals in the world. Studies published there are supposed to be both rock solid scientifically important and subjected to extreme peer review. This study appears to reach very shaky conclusions using adjusted data. ‘HIDE THE HIATUS!’ HOW THE CLIMATE ALARMISTS ELIMINATED THE INCONVENIENT ‘PAUSE’ IN GLOBAL WARMING'The thrust of Karl’s paper is this: that far from staying flat since 1998, global temperatures have carried on rising. It’s just that scientists haven’t noticed before because they’ve been looking in the wrong place – on land, rather than in the sea where all the real heat action is happening.
And how did Karl et al notice what everyone else has missed until now? Well, by using a specialized scientific technique called “getting your excuses in early before the Paris climate conference in December.”
Essentially, this technique involves making adjustments to the raw temperature data (sound familiar?) and discovering – lo! – that the skeptics were wrong and the alarmists were right all along.
Karl’s paper makes much of the fact that the methods used for gathering sea temperature data have changed over the years: in the old days it used to involve buckets; more recently, engine intake thermometers. Hence his excuse for these magical “adjustments”. Apparently (amazingly, conveniently), the measurements used since 1998 have been “running cold” and therefore needed correcting in a (handy) upward direction in order to show what has really been happening to global warming. Once you realize this – global warming turns out to be as real and present and dangerous as ever it was.
As the GWPF reports there are several glaring problems with Karl’s paper, starting with the fact that it contradicts all the other surface temperature data sets and also satellite data (which clearly shows no warming post 1998). Also, without any plausible explanation, Karl also chooses not to use the data from the Argo array “that is our best coherent data set on ocean temperatures.” The suspicion naturally arises that this is because if Karl had used the Argo findings, they would have made his paper look ridiculous. Here is the satellite temperature data since 1998 Global warming has been on pause for 19 years': Study reveals Earth's temperature has remained almost CONSTANT since 1995 Now if you have two data sets and the adjusted data is giving you completely different results from the raw data one must immediately scrutinize the methods and motivations of the adjuster. I have changed my opinion on global warming from undecided to skeptic. If I see clear (non adjusted) data set showing a simultaneous rises in both surface temperature and satellite temperature readings I will reconsider. Until then I am going to dismiss any argument using "adjusted" data. "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
September 28, 2015, 07:13:33 AM |
|
CoinCube you lack intuition which is the ability to separate impossible shit from the rest regardless of data. If you are only skeptical of global warming and not outright crying fraud, then I think you need to re-review the fundamental tenet of the scientific method known as the Shannon-Nyquist theorem. The math of this theorem also implies that you must sample at twice the period of the long-tail otherwise you have aliasing error. There is no fucking way you can say anything about the climate model until you've look at 1000s of years of patterns. Giving any credence to this nonsense of making any kind of statements based on 50 years of global industrialization is for fools who lack intuition. We are headed into a Little Ice Age. You had better get your intuition working better and pronto. http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/37504If we just take 2015.75 and move back in time in 309.6 year intervals, we come not only to the periods when the climate turned very cold, we also come to the periods of the political changes in government. The 1700s market the start of the uprising against monarchy. The 1396 period market the beginning of capitalism with the Black Death killing about 50% of the European population. The year 777 was the start of Saxon invasions and Charlemagne beginning to consolidate Europe once again forming nation states. The previous cycle was the fall of Rome. These changes in climate have coincided with political changes. The climate shift to very cold places tremendous stress upon the people and starvation begins to rise.
Unfortunately, this is not caused by man driving his cars to work. We are dealing with a very serious change in climate that is entirely natural. No amount of regulation or raising taxes, which academics and government will argue for, will reverse this trend for we did not create it. This is simply the result of a thermodynamic system we call the sun. |
|
|
|
CoinCube
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
|
September 28, 2015, 07:32:51 AM |
|
CoinCube you lack intuition which is the ability to separate impossible shit from the rest regardless of data.
If you are only skeptical of global warming and not outright crying fraud, then I think you need to re-review the fundamental tenet of the scientific method known as the Shannon-Nyquist theorem. Having spent very little time on the topic of Global Warming (my interest really lay elsewhere) general skepticism is where I am right now. Perhaps if I spent the time to delve deeply into the topic my opinions would harden. However, since it took me over a year to dedicate the small amount of time to the topic that I did today this will realistically never happen. The purpose of the above post was mainly to summarize and share the data that caused me to shift from undecided to skeptic as I figure many readers are like me and unlikely to ever spend any significant time on this topic. Also I think my intuition is quite good thank you very much |
|
|
|
|
suda123
|
|
September 28, 2015, 07:35:34 AM |
|
Recently there has been debate about a global warming pause. Apparently the temperature data both land based and satellite data have shown little global warming since 1998. There have been many attempts to explain this pause including theories about volcanic eruption and the oceans absorbing more heat. This year there was an article in the Journal of Science arguing that there was no pause in global warming and that the data once "adjusted" revealed the previously hidden warming trend. A chart summarizing the papers conclusions. US scientists: Global warming pause 'no longer valid'Now science is one of the most selective scientific journals in the world. Studies published there are supposed to be both rock solid scientifically important and subjected to extreme peer review. This study appears to reach very shaky conclusions using adjusted data. ‘HIDE THE HIATUS!’ HOW THE CLIMATE ALARMISTS ELIMINATED THE INCONVENIENT ‘PAUSE’ IN GLOBAL WARMING'The thrust of Karl’s paper is this: that far from staying flat since 1998, global temperatures have carried on rising. It’s just that scientists haven’t noticed before because they’ve been looking in the wrong place – on land, rather than in the sea where all the real heat action is happening.
And how did Karl et al notice what everyone else has missed until now? Well, by using a specialized scientific technique called “getting your excuses in early before the Paris climate conference in December.”
Essentially, this technique involves making adjustments to the raw temperature data (sound familiar?) and discovering – lo! – that the skeptics were wrong and the alarmists were right all along.
Karl’s paper makes much of the fact that the methods used for gathering sea temperature data have changed over the years: in the old days it used to involve buckets; more recently, engine intake thermometers. Hence his excuse for these magical “adjustments”. Apparently (amazingly, conveniently), the measurements used since 1998 have been “running cold” and therefore needed correcting in a (handy) upward direction in order to show what has really been happening to global warming. Once you realize this – global warming turns out to be as real and present and dangerous as ever it was.
As the GWPF reports there are several glaring problems with Karl’s paper, starting with the fact that it contradicts all the other surface temperature data sets and also satellite data (which clearly shows no warming post 1998). Also, without any plausible explanation, Karl also chooses not to use the data from the Argo array “that is our best coherent data set on ocean temperatures.” The suspicion naturally arises that this is because if Karl had used the Argo findings, they would have made his paper look ridiculous. Here is the satellite temperature data since 1998 Global warming has been on pause for 19 years': Study reveals Earth's temperature has remained almost CONSTANT since 1995Now if you have two data sets and the adjusted data is giving you completely different results from the raw data one must immediately scrutinize the methods and motivations of the adjuster. I have changed my opinion on global warming from undecided to skeptic. If I see clear (non adjusted) data set showing a simultaneous rises in both surface temperature and satellite temperature readings I will reconsider. Until then I am going to dismiss any argument using "adjusted" data. "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." It's ok friend, we all have roles to play! |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
September 28, 2015, 09:01:57 AM
Last edit: September 29, 2015, 01:42:50 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
CoinCube, not being able to spend adequate time on studying global warming is a valid reason for being only skeptical.
Except again, aren't you even aware that they are extrapolating from data that is not historical enough to even include the normal periodic cycles of global warming and cooling. I mean it wouldn't take more than a few minutes of googling to realize that.
Al Gore tried to point to those ice core charts going to back 100,000s of years. But when we zoom in on his charts, the temperature rise was leading the rise in CO2 by 800 years. The sun warms the planet. Warming oceans release more CO2. Duh.
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
September 28, 2015, 11:37:53 PM |
|
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11692So forgive me, but the pound could fall to the 65 to 70 US cent area at the worse case scenario byafter 2015. I know that sounds off-the-wall and it is about a 50% fall. But drastic movements are necessary to force drastic political change.
...
When we look at the timing array you can see the 2015/2016 turning point. Now look at the volatility coming after that target. It is going nuts on top of the Panic Cycles in 2016 and 2021. Look at the Directional Changes starting in 2014. This is warning of unbelievable confusion and tremendous oscillations that will break the backs of men and put on trial the philosophies of decades. Damn, I hope everyone caught this post. |
|
|
|
|
|
altcoinUK
|
|
September 29, 2015, 12:16:21 AM |
|
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11692... So forgive me, but the pound could fall to the 65 to 70 US cent area at the worse case scenario byafter 2015. I know that sounds off-the-wall and it is about a 50% fall. But drastic movements are necessary to force drastic political change.
...
When we look at the timing array you can see the 2015/2016 turning point. Now look at the volatility coming after that target. It is going nuts on top of the Panic Cycles in 2016 and 2021. Look at the Directional Changes starting in 2014. This is warning of unbelievable confusion and tremendous oscillations that will break the backs of men and put on trial the philosophies of decades. Damn, I hope everyone caught this post. I just pointed it out to a friend yesterday. I think he is buying US dollars now :-))) We are going to have lots of problems in the UK. |
|
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1852
|
|
September 29, 2015, 01:56:35 AM |
|
...
Thanks, TPTB and trollercoaster for posting. Armstrong draws a line in the sand it looks like (though I will go read the article).
I missed that because a guy came along and clipped the open door on my SUV at noon today. Spent 7 and 1/2 hours dealing the perp, my insurance company, driving a looooonngg way to the body shop, wrangling with my insurer, and finally picking up my rental. Oh, and an hour back home. Sheesh!
At least I wasn't hurt. Just aggravated.
I didn't know it was illegal to drive with a door that won't shut (LOL?). Yeah, that would have made today perfect, getting a ticket while driving my crippled truck...
|
|
|
|
|
|
altcoinUK
|
|
September 29, 2015, 02:11:40 AM |
|
It will be interesting to see what the market brings today. Though (as far as I know) Armstrong never project daily market moves he has indicated that once the market close below 16160 then it can test the August lows as well as it can go to as low as 13K. Now, the futures are trading at high 15K and it could easily test the lows today or in the next few days.
I hope Armstrong will be correct on this one as well and then hopefully the FED start doing the right thing for the economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
