We previously saw a Fox News pie chart that had a couple extra slices (here). Now, fair and balanced math adds up to 120 percent of voters indicating that they view the science on global warming to be rigged.
This is an interesting Rasmussen poll when you add up the number and discover that you are in a parallel universe.
The question is: “In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?” According to the poll, 35 percent thought it very likely, 24 percent somewhat likely, 21 percent not very likely, and 5 percent not likely at all (15 percent weren’t sure).
This rather dubious poll is offered to show that people are dubious about the science and math of global warming experts.
For the full story, click here
Byron,
A little research before going partisan might have better served you. Even wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading
Gore isn’t the issue. And for the record, I find him a bit of a tool. Not evil per se, but a bit of a doorknob. I’m not defending Mr I Invented the Internet.
The issue is that industry is not capable of self-regulating through a market mechanism or any other mechanism. Any industry. One cannot put the foxes in charge of the henhouse and not expect disaster. The issue is that by their nature corporations and their amoral drivers will not change without regulation and forced compliance – which is not a market mechanism it’s a legal mechanism. It’s not a political partisan abuse. Unless you think Gore forced this scheme on the EU too (which is ridiculous). And I’m pretty sure Tata’s Indian owners could give a damn what the former Veep has to say unless they just happen to agree with him. It’s a systemic legal formal abuse that’s the root cause here. The problem is corporations want to turn everything into a shell game when left to their own devices. Profit uber alles. But the problem isn’t partisan. It’s bi-partisan. It’s corporatism. That carbon trading is going to be abused should be no more of a shock than any other Wall St. Ponzi scheme.
bDAMAN:
that is a very interesting piece of information. can you document it?
Looks like the rich and powerful are going to make out like bandits and the working man is going to get f . . . d right up his proletarian ass.
And this is all being done by who? Oh yes Al Gore and his buddies, no greedy capitalist pigs in that bunch, socialist pigs certainly.
No wonder the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy are buying timber land, carbon credits, big money, socialist T. Looks like old Reds gonna be a trillionaire on the backs of them lackey proletarians. If you cant beat the capitalist pigs just put them out of business, I guess Lenin had the right idea. Except this bunch isn’t using rope.
I love the smell of fresh air in the morning, it smells like poverty for the working man and money for the rich environmentalists.
I wonder how much money an acre of timber will be worth in terms of carbon credits, I hope a bunch. I might just come to like global warming and environmentalism.
bdaman,
I am about to shock you.
You’re right in what you see and you’re right it’s a shell game.
Where you are wrong is thinking it would be terribly controversial.
That fascists are turning what is ostensibly supposed to be a plan to reduce carbon in the environment into just another Ponzi shell game of shuffle the money is a point many here would not contest. Carbon Trading is going to fail because of the trading part of that equation. Market mechanisms are not an appropriate fix to a problem that requires regulation and forced compliance. Especially when there is more money in not fixing a damn thing and making people think you are hard at work. Creating the illusion of work/change is cheaper than actually working/changing. And Wall St. isn’t just greedy. They are lazy too. Why work for what you can steal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain . . .
Bob Esq:
something smells fishy about that site you linked to.
A story emerging out of Britain suggests “follow the money” may explain the enthusiasm of the United Nations to pursue caps on carbon emissions, despite doubts surfacing in the scientific community about the validity of the underlying global warming hypothesis.
A Mumbai-based Indian multinational conglomerate with business ties to Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman since 2002 of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, stands to make several hundred million dollars in European Union carbon credits simply by closing a steel production facility in Britain with the loss of 1,700 jobs.
The Tata Group headquartered in Mumbai anticipates receiving windfall profits of up to nearly $2 billion from closing the Corus Redcar steelmaking plant in Britain, with about half of the savings expected to result from cashing in on carbon credits granted the steelmaker by the European Union under the EU’s emissions trading scheme, or ETS.
Corus has accumulated 7.5 million European Union surplus carbon allowances, or EUAs, given the company free by the EU, after corporate officials lobbied EU officials aggressively in Brussels.
Mean while I can’t see thru my windows or open my front door, too much snow.
Sorry, I meant ‘what’s the maximum operating speed of a 767 and how fast was AAL175 reported to have been traveling when it hit the South Tower?
Byron,
John Skilling
John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or Douglas DC-8.
A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners traveling 600 mph — a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01.
“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.”
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
BTW, what’s the maximum operating speed of a 767 and how fast was AAL11 reported to have been traveling when it hit the North Tower?
Buddha,
I agree with everything you’ve been saying regarding asymmetrical damage causing a symmetrical collapse. But you should know why I begin my argument with the heat problem.
To begin an analysis, of what happened that day, with a discussion of the destruction of the buildings, you’re inviting anyone within earshot to rattle off a ‘possible scenario’ that smacks of “Indiana Jones Science.” What’s Indiana Jones Science, I hear you ask? It’s magical thinking pushed beyond the limits of even the histrionic imagination. Jumping out of an airplane with a life raft means safety (because, according to movie magic, the terminal velocity of a free falling inflated raft is slow enough to keep your skull & spine from shattering upon impact); hiding in a refrigerator at ground zero of a nuclear test blast will keep you from burning to a cinder or breaking your neck upon impact; etc.
The other problem is the tendency for blind adherents to the ‘official story’ to demand that the person challenging the plausibility of the official story come up with an all encompassing alternative theory. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies). Your everyday tin-foil hat conspiracy nut doesn’t comprehend the aforesaid principle, and thus makes claims without support. This is yet another violation of Ockham’s razor, or the law of parsimony, since the very existence of claims without support is clear evidence of postulating the existence of another entity when it is not absolutely necessary to do so.
So why do you begin with the molten metal and heat? Because it brings up a deficit in the explanation provided pursuant to an inviolable law of nature. The requirement for an explanation is so demanding, it sounds like a character from “Goodfellas” is demanding it.
Henry Hill: [narrating] “Now the guy’s got Paulie as a partner. Any problems, he goes to Paulie. Trouble with the bill? He can go to Paulie. Trouble with the cops, deliveries, Tommy, he can call Paulie. But now the guy’s gotta come up with Paulie’s money every week no matter what. Business bad? F’ you, pay me. Oh, you had a fire? F’ you, pay me. Place got hit by lightning huh? F’ you, pay me.”
Steel and other metals existing at the heat of fusion for nearly six months REQUIRES A SUSTAINED SOURCE OF HEAT.
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091201moltenmetal#a091201moltenmetal
Where did it come from? Or … “F’ you, pay me.”
infinite inputs
This video shows where all that fuel went. When the plane hit the building, the fuselage being much weaker than the building, disintegrated. The fuel dispersed and ignited, resulting in a ball of flame.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0Qu6eyyr4c&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
Slarti:
“You’re an engineer, right? Would you try to control a system with positive feedback? (For those of you who don’t know, if you use positive feedback to control a system, it oscillates out of control.)”
Exactly how will that happen? You assume that this is taking place in a vacuum or closed system it is not. The “market” is a huge diverse, chaotic system with literally infinitesimal inputs.
Please explain to me how consumer regulation will cause it to spin out of control?
Man I am really waiting to hear this, if you answer this it may just cause me to change my mind about capitalism.
Hansen said CRU scientists should
release data “science works that
way” even though GISS, headed
by Hansen, has thus far not released
information requested through the
freedom of information act and may
soon end up being sued by C.E.I.
Slarti,
Seriously, you work with statistics and complex differential data sets. It doesn’t strike you odd that such a narrowly defined behavior (orderly collapse) came from such a long string of conditional probabilities (temp/materials/sequence of failure/collateral stresses and factors)? One can answer singular questions in analysis without having answered the underlying math being expressed. Heisenberg, Bohr and Hawking would have had much different careers if Einstein had been able to “see perfectly” all the math his theories implied. This isn’t solely a chemistry or engineering problem is my point. It’s also a probability problem. Keep in mind the more conditions precedent there are to an outcome, the greater the chance that outcome will not be achieved due to error in operation. More parts equals more chance of error in all systems.
I’m not saying an anomaly or a narrow result isn’t possible. I’m saying it’s improbable. I’m not going to side other than that on this issue and I don’t think I did above. Mark me down as “present but skeptical”. Like Bob I’ll admit I have some energy deficiency questions too, but that has never been my grind. But what I do find unusual is your easy acceptance of an “optimal” outcome (not truly or no one would have died, but you get my meaning) on based on so many contingent variables. Given what I know you know about complexity from previous discussions, I find this a little curious.
That long chain of conditions precedent and the narrow rage of desired behaviors from the complex system(s) under stress nags at me. I don’t have a problem with so much that the building failed but with how it failed. It in spectrum of possible outcomes absent intervention, it’s like winning a lottery. Actually, a consistently good pick at roulette is probably a better analogy. Speaking of probability, probably everyone’s grandfather has said (in this country anyway), “That’s too much sugar for a nickle.”
At least it seems to me anyway.
I can’t figure out how to post a link to a GIF file. Sorry
Byron,
Approach speed is a full-flaps, decreasing altitude, speed. It is not a speed in which the aircraft is intended to remain in the air. In addition, the possibility of a damaged aircraft must have been recognized. If the lift surfaces are damaged or fouled (icing) greater speed must be maintained in order to create lift.
We need to look at what hit the building. The buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable.
The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure.
If we ignore everything else, can you explain the residual heat?
Here’s a good picture that demonstrates what happened to the kerosene (jet fuel) as the plane hit WTC-2 (on the left) and the black smoke on the right demonstrates the burning of plastic.
Why did you decide to limit the time for installation of thermite and charges to one weekend? Why couldn’t a “maintenance contractor” have installed the necessary items over a period of months or years? Of course it would be done in secret.
In September of 2006, Kelly J. McCrum sold 1525 S Sangamon St. Unit 707, Chicago IL to a person named Osama Barakat.
Kelly J. McCrum is the wife of Craig M. Robinson. Craig Robinson is Michelle Obama’s brother.
The part of the transaction that I found odd was the creditor. Burlew Plumbing & Heating of New Jersey issued credit for the transaction.
Burlew also owns Magic Touch Construction Company Inc. This contractor does nonresidential construction, plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning.
Knowing how New York and New Jersey share contracts for Port Authority work, I can’t help but wonder if this is the same Magic Plumbing and Heating that had contract work at the World Trade Center on September 5th, 2001.
Excerpts of stories:
Magic Plumbing and Heating who messed up the sprinkler systems in the WTC that failed on 9/11.
SEPTEMBER 5, 2001 : (WTC : HAMMAD DOES WORK ON WTC SPRINKLER SYSTEM — See MAGIC PLUMBING & HEATING, 9/11 INVESTIGATION, TN LICENSE CASE — BROOKLYN CELL) Sakher “Rocky” Hammad, who works for Magic Plumbing and Heating on 93rd Street in Brooklyn, is known to have done work on the sprinkler system in the World Trade Center, and when arrested he has a photo ID WTC visitor’s pass for this date. The identity of the tenant who hired him is not known. On 2/5/02, Hammad is one of five Arab men arrested in connection with the fiery murder of Tennessee drivers’ license examiner Katherine Smith several days earlier. Hammad also spent time in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn in 2000.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 : (WTC CENTER —– See SAKHER “ROCKY” HAMMAD , MAGIC PLUMBING & HEATING, BROOKLYN CELL) “The sprinkler system had turned on and had started to do something, but it wasn’t doing its job as it should, so there was water sloshing down the stairways.”
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 : ( NY TO MEMPHIS, TN – See : TN LICENSE FRAUD CASE, ?MAGIC PLUMBING?, 9/11 SCOUTS) One of the men, authorities say, drove from New York to Memphis on September 11 — the day of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. And one of them, at the time of his [Sakher A Hammad’s] arrest, was carrying in his wallet a pass to the trade center dated September 5.
FEBRUARY 5, 2002 : (SAKHER “ROCKY” HAMMAD IS ARRESTED– See MAGIC PLUMBING & HEATING, TN DMV CASE, BROOKLYN CELL) On 2/5/02, Hammad is one of five Arab men arrested in connection with the fiery murder of Tennessee drivers’ license examiner Katherine Smith several days earlier. Hammad also spent time in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn in 2000.
I have often wondered if that was the Brooklyn terror cell that was being tracked in Able Danger.
The Congressional Record:
77 . ABLE DANGER FAILURE — (House of Representatives – October 19, 2005)
Excerpt of Curt Weldon:
What I did not know, Mr. Speaker, up until June of this year, was that the secret program called Able Danger actually identified the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda in January and February of 2000, over 1 year before 9/11 every happened. In addition, I learned that not only did we identify the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda, but we identified Mohamed Atta as one of the members of that Brooklyn cell along with three other terrorists who were the leadership of the 9/11 attack.
I have also learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, again, over 1 year before 9/11, that Able Danger team attempted on three separate occasions to provide information to the FBI about the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda, and on three separate occasions they were denied by lawyers in the previous administration to transfer that information.
Mr. Speaker, this past Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Louis Freeh, FBI Director at the time, was interviewed by Tim Russert. The first question to Louis Freeh was in regard to the FBI’s ability to ferret out the terrorists. Louis Freeh’s response, which can be obtained by anyone in this country as a part of the official record, was, Well, Tim, we are now finding out that a top-secret program of the military called Able Danger actually identified the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda and Mohammed Atta over a year before 9/11.
And what Louis Freeh said, Mr. Speaker, is that that kind of actionable data could have allowed us to prevent the hijackings that occurred on September 11.
Robert:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/faqs/arcandapproachspeeds.pdf
approach speed for 707 is 128 knots is equal to 147 mph.
why would you design a building for a fully fueled plane traveling at 600 mph? that doesn’t make sense to me.
I have to believe the evidence of my own eyes and my knowledge of structural engineering. A building designed in 1970 is not going to be able to sustain that amount of energy and remain standing. The fact that it remained erect for over an hour is a testament to the brilliance of the design engineer and his team.
In fact a building designed under today’s codes is not going to be able to sustain a hit like that.
I can account for every single phenomenon you or Bob Esq describe with a simple explanation. Note to Bob Esq. see Ockham’s razor and law of parsimony.
Byron: “A steel building does not collapse because of fire but because of additional stresses caused by the heat. Building connection are mostly stationary and restrain columns and beams from moving vertically or horizontally. As you well know when steel heats it expands in a very predictable fashion and there is a constant of thermal expansion for steel (you can look it up). Ergo the need for expansion joints on steel bridges, sometimes allowing for 6″ of movement depending on bridge length.”
Byron,
There’s a difference between the need for expansion joints on a bridge and a fire on a few floors of a high rise tower. The entire bridge is reacting to a change in temperature; with added solar radiation directed at the pavement. The tower, above and below the points of fire, remain at room temperature. IOW, that hot little pancake will never fall through the stove and floor of the kitchen.
In Re design for jet impacts:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
Bryon,
The laws of physics demand an explanation for the excess heat residing in the debris piles of both towers and WTC 7. A NASA thermograph taken a few days after the attack measured the temperatures to be far from reaching thermal equilibrium at ground zero.
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091201moltenmetal#a091201moltenmetal
Thus, according to Sir Ockham, we must postulate the existence of another entity acting here; i.e. the source of the sustained heat.
Slartibartfast,
Why did you decide to limit the time for installation of thermite and charges to one weekend? Why couldn’t a “maintenance contractor” have installed the necessary items over a period of months or years? Of course it would be done in secret.
“Is it not possible that burning jet fuel and plastics (and whatever other inflammables in the WTC could result in a fire hotter than any of these elements would burn at individually?”
What are these other inflammables? How did they get put in the right combination and the right proximity? MOST of the fuel went up in a ball of flame upon impact. There was no constant supply of jet fuel (which we should really be calling kerosene).
I could respond to many of the things that you presented, but one thing is more important than all of them. If you were in charge of safety for Manhattan, and after somebody had attempted to take out the footings of the building in 1993 you recognized the potential damage caused by a 1400 ft. tall building would cause if it fell over in downtown Manhattan, what would you do?