Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[flynn]

We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts.

But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.

I totally agree with this. CO2 is a good gas. Earth is greening because of it and people stop dying from starvation.

What convinced me is that CO2 absorbs all the energy in its absorption bands after 10 meters of travel in the atmosphere.
So if you double the CO2, you just make this number becoming 5 meters, and nothing warms up more than it does already.

 

[1713993610]

1713993610

[1713993610]

1713993610

[1713993610]

1713993610

[1713993610]

1713993610

[1713993610]

1713993610

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.

On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?

Vast question.

- climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell.
- There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years
- No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time)
- Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory
- look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR
- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/

- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier.

Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term.

Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather.

All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes.

However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid.

We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts.

But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.

I don't deny the possibility of that, since it would make sense. But our ecosystem is way more complex and has more knobs and dials that interact with each other than just CO2 and oxygen.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with population models, but there could very well be a point beyond which everything tips and triggers a reaction in the opposite direction.
E.g. more CO2 = more life, then at some point there's too much CO2 = less life, be it due to primary (an upper limit on how much can be held or used) or due to side effects (effects of increased CO2 on other parts of the ecosystem) of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.
Humans can easily die from drinking too much water at once, so "more oxygen" might not be an unequivocally good thing either (too much of it would eventually increase the pressure which can be fatal even without any other effects on the ecosystem).

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

What is the cost of bitcoin in energy since now? In $ and energy units?



For Pow the solution goes with 0 energy chips... but when? PoS has a point...

[Phil_S]

Keep in mind that in the interim, we could literally drift sideways for a year+.

Could be. I'm mentally preparing myself for a very boring 2018. As long as we're reaching 40k-50k somewhere in 2019...

[romneymoney]

The climate change garbage in here talking to someone who doesn't understand bitcoin but thinks they do.

[Harlot]

What many has presumed that Bitcoin has broken the downtrend line and a lot of people think that it is the start for Bitcoin's reversal was all a dream as we are still not finish visiting below 10,000$ again. Looking at the charts specifically the 4 hour chart you will see an inverse head and shoulder which we currently right now at the right shoulder going down below 10,000$ (if it will form a inverse head and shoulder). They key here is too look at the right shoulder forming as there are a lot of ways to look at it and it might go down further. Other scenarios are Bitcoin bouncing right now and going back to 11,000$ again.

[Toxic2040]

Well I kinda implied that accumulation may be happening on the dl, but that doesn't mean that we're going to hit a new ATH in a month or two like people are expecting. They could accumulate like this for 6-8 months, hell even a year+. And we might see nothing but a sideways movement with a slight upward drift during that whole time.

I do agree is possible..even likely over the next quarter as TPTB wait for the game plan to be drafted and disseminated. Anywhere between 2009 and 2015, if this same scenario was playing out I would totally agree and let it go. However..2 orders of magnitude adoption has occurred since then and bitcoin has reached critical mass in the public's consciousness. I probably bore many of you with the constant referrals to physics but its just the way my brain works.

I don't really expect any ATH until mid to late summer. Wouldn't really mind it much later either though. The longer BTC stays low the easier it is to collect more, and with prices heading into the 6 to 7 digits I'd prefer stocking up on more coins than having a larger fiat holding a lot earlier.

Well..my position is pretty clear...just take a glance at my charts or the goose's game and you can see when I think the next ATH will happen. Bitcoin anywhere over 4 digits is fine by me. That its over 5 digits and has remained there is just gravy



I make my doodles on this one chart and just leave them so I can kinda see if my prognostications have any relevance. I seem to be out of phase still somewhat. Will update when the signal-to-noise ratio becomes clearer. This is hourly..so its really noisy.

[Ibian]

I'd be quite happy with lower temperatures. Winter is more enjoyable with proper powder snow, and summer wouldn't make me stay inside 24/7 if it didn't cause me to sweat all fucking day.

On that note, I've read about an upcoming mini ice age a few times. Is there any recent update on that that confirms or rejects it?

Vast question.

- climate is whether over 30 years. So it's too soon to tell.
- There was a global warming during the last 100 years of about 0.1°C/10years
- No more warming since 1998, once you remove El Nino/LaNina effects (which cancel each other in time)
- Sun is probably having a period of low activity, that doesn't change much the energy it sends to us, but less activity (= less spots) means less magnetic field, means more cosmic rays reaching our atmosphere, meaning more seeded clouds, thus more albedo and then cold coming in... but this is still a theory
- look here for the latest temps : https://moyhu.blogspot.fr/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#NCAR
- best site ever for these questions : https://wattsupwiththat.com/

- last but not least : cold kills; warm weather makes our life easier.

Keeping in mind of course that things like math is still a theory. Hypothesis may be a better term.

Also also keeping in mind that it's the left that are going on about the weather.

All of science and anything empirical is ultimately a hypothesis. No amount confirmations (that turns things into theories and laws in academia) can guarantee with certainty that we've figured something out, rather than just witnessing an infinitely unlikely event.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if industrialization had an impact on global weather patterns. In chaotic system even the tiniest perturbation can trigger massive macroscopical changes.

However, I'm not quite convinced yet about us having any significant impact either for two reasons. Namely, I haven't studied the papers so I can't possibly know if there are any systematic errors, and I see too much bullshit going on in the media to not be heavily sceptical. I do lean towards human emissions of CO2 causing changes in climate, mostly because I've worked with people who study precisely that, but even if that turned out true I wouldn't be all that worried about it. Capitalism will come to the rescue and figure out a way to keep us nice and cozy regardless of weather conditions. With nuclear fusion pretty much around the corner energy won't be a concern and with that sorted out the overall state of the planet should be irrelevant. Things might change drastically (e.g. underground, on- and/or underwater or shielded off cities with indoor farming), but I don't see humans disappearing unless we nuke ourselves to hell or get wiped out by some rogue asteroid.

We were burning forests way before we burned coal and oil. In fact, any living creature affects the weather. I understand that at least one american state has legislation regarding cow farts.

But more importantly, co2 is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it's plant food. Which is food for everything else. The more co2, the more oxygen, the more life. It might just be a good thing.

I don't deny the possibility of that, since it would make sense. But our ecosystem is way more complex and has more knobs and dials that interact with each other than just CO2 and oxygen.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with population models, but there could very well be a point beyond which everything tips and triggers a reaction in the opposite direction.
E.g. more CO2 = more life, then at some point there's too much CO2 = less life, be it due to primary (an upper limit on how much can be held or used) or due to side effects (effects of increased CO2 on other parts of the ecosystem) of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.
Humans can easily die from drinking too much water at once, so "more oxygen" might not be an unequivocally good thing either (too much of it would eventually increase the pressure which can be fatal even without any other effects on the ecosystem).

You would have to explain how the proposed hypothesis works.

[gembitz]

The climate change garbage in here talking to someone who doesn't understand bitcoin but thinks they do.

bitcoin mining causing polar ice melt ~ baby seals will die? :-D lol

[savetherainforest]

Lets stop posting more than 1 message a week after page     20.000 !!!

[realr0ach]

HAHA The most unbelievable, fake, child actors on TV right now reading scripts that obviously weren't even written by them talking about how guns need to be banned.  The Jewish media did so poorly with this propaganda it's inevitable it completely backfires on them.  The one blonde child actor "Delaney Tarr" even started laughing while reading her fake lines when she's supposed to be sad HAHA.

[JayJuanGee]

The American right wing conspiratard radio commentator. I don’t know his name but he talks about gay frogs. So he is gay frogs guy.

I believe that would be Alex Jones.

Sounds familiar so probably right.  

Gerald Celente was on Alex Jones yesterday (depending on your time zone) telling people to buy Bitcoin.

Do you have a link for that?  I feel like I wasted some of my life listening to Alex Jones trying to find it, and then the Gerald Celente crypto currencies part was at 2 hours 23 minutes and 30 seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwe_iMi8-fw

I did not even believe him to be recommending anything, and he does not really seem to know how to differentiate bitcoin from other cryptos because he said that the "valuable ones" are the ones that offer a kind of product, and I have recently been seeing that kind of bullshit discussion that in order to be valuable cryptocurrencies have to offer a product.

Accordingly, cryptocurrency pundits miss the whole fucking idea (or product of bitcoin), and they fail to realize that bitcoin is the actual product because of what it actually offers in terms of liberating folks from traditional money's control over you.

Furthermore, Alex Jones is no where to be seen, and what Alex needs is to have someone on his show specifically informing him about the Roger dat bullshit, and maybe even have an ability for both Roger and a regular bitcoin supporter to debate... someone who can hold their own to Roger.. which should be anyone who is fairly knowledgeable about bitcoin, and understands the bullshiterie of Bcash.

Also, if Roger were to go on a little rant that he does not want bcash to be called bcash, then perhaps the discussion should end at that point because roger can call his bcash anything that he wants, but if he will not engage with you because you continue to call bcash, bcash, then may as well not discuss the matter with the loonie...

[JayJuanGee]

Lets stop posting more than 1 message a week after page     20.000 !!!

Let's NOT and say that we did.         

[realr0ach]

Shit's gonna drop below $10k in the next 24 hours.

Ayo hole up, you be sayin we wuz vikings n sheeit?

[suchmoon]

Fine. Fuck you man. Shit's gonna drop below $10k in the next 24 hours.

Are you happy now ?!

It's just gonna tank faster now.

I think it's bad karma to talk about Bitcoin in this thread.

[realr0ach]

JayJuanGee post

[Toxic2040]

Also, if Roger were to go on a little rant that he does not want bcash to be called bcash, then perhaps the discussion should end at that point because roger can call his bcash anything that he wants, but if he will not engage with you because you continue to call bcash, bcash, then may as well not discuss the matter with the loonie...

I really like this. So much drama and energy...and most important...TIME..could have been saved with just this. Just to have called it VerCoin...WuCoin...whatevercoin. Just own your own branding instead of trying to befuddle bitcoin with half truths. They were so afraid back then that without the name brand it would not succeed. Now that crypto is going mainstream they have realized they could have called it anything and still have enough success to be economically viable. Hindsight smh.


*edit*

Bob wins the internet.

+10 WOsMerits

LOL for real.

[Karartma1]

I stopped believing that it is possible to apply regular TA to Bitcoin: I strongly believe that Bitcoin its a very rare beast during these times. No support or resistance lasts too long here and the same applies to ATHs.
Bitcoin's crazy stuff.
Good day guys. Go out and have fun

[Last of the V8s]

Been summoned to a family lunch today. Least Favourite Daughter-in-Law wants 'to have a serious talk'. Can't seem to find my chequebook, but am sure that won't matter. Mustn't be late.

I’m in Cape Verde (just waiting for coach back to airport) with inlaws which has been paid for by us (they’re cheap bastards). Can’t wait to get home now tbh

Families are a pain in the ass especially one’s who aren’t blood.

Well I did her a great disfavour prejudging her so. Last Christmas I'd apparently been teasing them all that bitcoin is tied to identity and when a holder dies their coin has to go back in to the 'mining pool', so they shouldn't expect anything from me. But lo she had since done some research 'for me' and this is not the case at all. In fact, it is quite like real money and you can just send it to anyone. Perhaps if I didn't understand it all that well, it might be better to distribute my coin 'around the family' before the 'time' comes, just to 'be safe'. I started in on my long discourse on primogeniture (this creature is married to Indolent Son Number 2), how it is a great mistake to break up estates and spare sons really always made for excellent bishops or conquerors in mediaeval times... I used to tease Son 2 about that stuff, but he knows I'm just being a dick. Next update: at Easter if we get that far, I suppose she'll be tackling me on fairness and partible inheritance.

[Biodom]

Plus more than 95% of c02 comes from natural sources not human influence. "Climate change" is bullshit. It's just cyclical and perfectly normal variance.

I also see the argument regarding CO2 level as too simplistic.
Maybe there is no climate change.
However, one thing is difficult to argue with: human population affects on environment.
This is discussed less, because the remedies are unknowable.

Specifically, humans may be causing the sixths extinction event in planet's history.
For those who would argue that it is "natural"-no it isn't because it is happening too fast-within 100-150 years, not millions of years.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/19/humans-creating-sixth-great-extinction-of-animal-species-say-scientists

Under a “natural” rate of extinction, the study said that two species go extinct per 10,000 species per 100 years, rather than the one species that previous work has assumed.

Modern rates of extinction were eight to 100 times higher , the authors found. For example, 477 vertebrates have gone extinct since 1900, rather than the nine that would be expected at natural rates.

Unfortunately, the way it may develop would be either for us to go non-biological and, hence, have little imprint on life OR natural habitats would become so stressed that extremely effective life forms would arise and finish us off one way or another.

Examples: HIV, of course; brain eating amoeba (guess, who has the most brain/mass ratio?); green algae virus that makes you 'stupid'; mosquito spread virus (Zika) that makes babies being born with a smaller size brain

'stupid' virus:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/virus-that-makes-humans-more-stupid-discovered-9849920.html

Zika:
https://www.cdc.gov/zika/healtheffects/birth_defects.html