Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Surly Newz / Re: The Daily Meme
« Last post by jdwheeler42 on Today at 07:21:37 AM »
Funny bit of info on this.  In order to get a hunting license you have to take a class on gun safety.  But if you aren't going to hunt, then you don't need the gun safety class, and you can just go buy your large capacity semi-auto handgun and go kill people with it.  What kind of sense does that make? 

I think in order to have a handgun you should have to have a concealed carry license, and in order to have a riffle or shotgun you should have to take the hunter safety class. 

What's the logic here?  In order to have a hunting license to go shoot deer you have to take a hunter safety class, which is just about gun control (as in breath control and the like).  But to buy a gun to just have you can just go buy one so long as you are 18 and aren't a felon.  Fuckin' retarded is what it is. 
That's the kind of gun control I fully support, namely:

1.) Hitting your target
2.) Making sure it doesn't go off accidentally
3.) Making sure no one else gets hold of it

If you can't control your gun that way, you have no business owning one.
Surly Newz / Re: The Daily Meme
« Last post by jdwheeler42 on Today at 07:05:42 AM »

I think this logic is quite biased. It looks to me more like the Russians took the position that having anyone other than Clinton as US President would be in the Russian national interest. And I can easily see why they felt that way.

You have posited a syllogism, I think.

Possibly, but it doesn't make Pfeiffer right, regardless.
Indeed, Pfeiffer is assuming that Putin wanted to damage the US.  To me, it looks much more like Putin had a personal vendetta against Hillary herself rather than any strategic planning.
Surly Newz / Re: The Daily Meme
« Last post by Eddie on Today at 05:42:39 AM »
She wants a bullet-proof vest. The cops here (and I suspect everywhere else) are upgrading their body armor to a heavier type designed to stop rifle bullets.
Geopolitics / Re: Global Systemic Geopolitical Crisis
« Last post by Eddie on Today at 05:25:21 AM »
Anarchist...what a shit term. Might as well call yourself a Unicorn.

Anarchy = rule by "no leaders"
It has some examples of working quite well - for example: Catalans during Civil War of 1930s.
I cannot visualise what the first local meeting would be like here - most problems are fixed by leaders agreeing to put the problem aside as a problem to be fixed later. Nothing at all to do with the government.  Some say the islands aren't even a country!  For survival, I reckon on staying right out of it, and agreeing with my leader/landowner family head.

As for your old Empire, I reckon it will be banditry.

Let's see how you're doing in 6 months after the boat stops coming. If you survive that long, then maybe you'll be fine. I make no predictions about what will happen here, but I suspect it'll be less banditry and more widespread starvation and despair and grinding poverty. Just a guess.

Anarchy....we're all anarchists temporarily going along to get along. Nobody doesn't want freedom. Control over your own destiny, a desire to be left alone. These are fundamental desires. And yet we're all at the mercy of somebody.

Here we live at the behest of the empire. There, it's whomever the local Big Cheese tribal patriarch happens to be, and that's subject to change in a hurry, in a SHTF scenario. No place is not a country. But yes, the smaller and less important your island, the better off you are, because whomever has dominion over it might not care enough to exercise it, or be spread too thin to bother you much.

Freedom is inversely proportional to population density, and so is self reliance. I'd learn to fish if I were you, if you aren't already.Or how to do something to contribute to the group effort.

When I think of anarchists I think of all the scam artists on the net trying to promote it for the price of a Doug Casey newsletter. They want to sell you a 2nd passport or a condo in Uruguay...but mostly they sell useless how-to information that you won't be able to use. It sounds good. Anarchy is the ultimate pipe dream.
A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years.

In a recent speech at the University of Chicago, James Anderson — a professor of atmospheric chemistry at Harvard University — warned that climate change is drastically pushing Earth back to the Eocene Epoch from 33 million BCE, when there was no ice on either pole. Anderson says current pollution levels have already catastrophically depleted atmospheric ozone levels, which absorb 98 percent of ultraviolet rays, to levels not seen in 12 million years.

Anderson’s assessment of humanity’s timeline for action is likely accurate, given that his diagnosis and discovery of Antarctica’s ozone holes led to the Montreal Protocol of 1987. Anderson’s research was recognized by the United Nations in September of 1997. He subsequently received the United Nations Vienna Convention Award for Protection of the Ozone Layer in 2005, and has been recognized by numerous universities and academic bodies for his research.

While some governments have made commitments to reduce carbon emissions (Germany has pledged to cut 95 percent of carbon emissions by 2050), Anderson warned that those measures were insufficient to stop the extinction of humanity by way of a rapidly changing climate. Instead, Anderson is calling for a Marshall Plan-style endeavor in which all of the world takes extreme measures to transition off of fossil fuels completely within the next five years.

    Recovery is all but impossible, he argued, without a World War II-style transformation of industry—an acceleration of the effort to halt carbon pollution and remove it from the atmosphere, and a new effort to reflect sunlight away from the earth’s poles.

    This has do[sic] be done, Anderson added, within the next five years.

    “The chance that there will be any permanent ice left in the Arctic after 2022 is essentially zero,” Anderson said, with 75 to 80 percent of permanent ice having melted already in the last 35 years.

Anderson’s prediction of Arctic sea ice disappearing by 2022 may be closer to reality than a lot of us would hope. In 2016, University of Reading professor Ed Hawkins compiled global temperature data dating back to 1850, prior to the Industrial Revolution of the early 20th century and the oil boom, and turning the data into a time-lapse GIF. The most alarming part of the data showed that temperatures began rising exponentially faster at the start of the 21st century and show no signs of slowing down.

The good news is there are a relatively small amount of culprits responsible for the vast majority of carbon emissions, meaning governments know who to focus on. As Grit Post reported in July of 2017, more than half of all carbon emissions between 1988 and 2016 can be traced back to just 25 fossil fuel giants around the world. 10 of those 25 top emitters are American companies, meaning the onus is largely on the United States to rein in major polluters like ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Marathon Oil. Other offenders include Chinese companies extracting and burning coal, and Russian oil conglomerates like Rosneft, Gazprom, and Lukoil.

However, the bad news for humanity is that as long as Donald Trump is President of the United States, swift action to combat climate change seems unlikely prior to 2020, given that Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accords and refuses to even acknowledge the threat of climate change despite warnings from U.S. government agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense.

 The populist far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has garnered record high support, latest polling shows. For the first time, the anti-immigrant party has become more popular than the Social Democrats (SPD).

Nationwide public support for AfD, which is known for its controversially harsh anti-Islam and anti-immigrant stances, has once again risen to a record 16 percent, a survey conducted by the INSA polling center for the German Bild daily newspaper shows. Their popularity is now comparable to the record support they once had in September 2016.

At the same time, the Social Democratic Party (SPD) is on a downward trend, as the public support for what once was one of the two major “people’s parties” in Germany seems to be waning. In what was called its worst post-war performance, the SPD received just 20.5 percent of the vote in the recent parliamentary elections in September 2017. Now, according to INSA, public support for the party has fallen to yet another all-time low of only 15.5 percent.

The AfD, however, improved its election result by more than three percentage points. Back in September, the far-right party gained 12.6 percent of the vote, allowing it to enter the German parliament for the first time in history.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), are still the strongest political forces in Germany, and they enjoy a clear lead in terms of public backing. The CDU/CSU alliance is still twice as popular as its closest rivals and has the backing of 32 percent of the German population. It is still one percentage point lower than its election result, though.

Notably, the poll figures allege that if the parliamentary elections in Germany had been held last Sunday, the CDU/CSU alliance would be unable to form a majority coalition with the Social Democrats – something that the two political forces are still desperately trying to accomplish almost five months after the elections. According to the poll, the CDU/CSU union and the SPD would only get 47.5 percent of the vote.

In the meantime, the AfD, which capitalized on the refugee crisis by repeatedly criticizing Merkel for her ‘open door’ policy, seems close to becoming the second most popular political party in Germany. The party, however, is still mired in controversy.

Most recently, Andre Poggenburg, state leader of the AfD in Saxony-Anhalt, provoked a wave of criticism by calling Turks living in Germany “camel drivers” who should “go back to where they belong.” His remarks were then lambasted by German politicians, ordinary citizens and even his own fellow party members.

The German Greens have 13 percent of public support. Meanwhile, the Left Party and the Free Democrats (FDP) both sustained small losses of around one percentage point and received 11 and nine percent of public support, respectively.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average index recently suffered two trading sessions when it lost more than 1,000 points. But American stocks may face a much bigger meltdown, warns banking giant Morgan Stanley.

Appetizer, not the main course,” the bank’s strategists wrote, describing the beginning of the year for the Dow, as quoted by Bloomberg.

The main threat to the stock market is higher bond yields and not faster inflation, according to analysts. A slowdown in the US economy could also be a factor for a decline in stocks.

“It’s when growth softens while inflation is still rising that returns suffer most,” Morgan Stanley wrote. “Strong global growth and a good first-quarter reporting season provided an important offset. We remain on watch for ‘tricky hand-off’ in the second quarter, as core inflation rises and activity indicators moderate.”

Despite the two bad days, the Dow is still up 2 percent since the beginning of the year, erasing all the losses.

Many analysts are comparing the current situation on the US stock markets to 2008 in the wake of the global financial crisis. At the time, stocks also hit several all-time highs, despite warning signs of the impending turmoil.

A recent Bank of America Merrill Lynch fund manager survey for February showed that 70 percent of those polled said the global economy is in its “late cycle.”
Tensions are so high at schools in Miami-Dade following the mass shooting in Broward that school-aimed threats on social media have skyrocketed from about one a week to more than 50 in a single day — and Miami-Dade school officials warned parents Friday there will be legal and disciplinary consequences for any student who initiates a threat.

The school board initiated a round of robo-calls to parents Friday make sure they convey the message to students.

“[Miami-Dade County Public Schools] is reminding the public and students that a written threat to kill or harm is a felony, will not be tolerated and perpetrators will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said M-DCPS spokeswoman Daisy Gonzalez-Diego in a statement Friday. “As a district, we will continue to emphasize the importance of responsible social media use.”

Miami-Dade Schools Police Chief Ian A. Moffett told the Miami Herald the department usually receives about one threat a week. But after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland that killed 17 people on Wednesday, threats leaped to more than 50 in one day.

“We’re getting people reposting threatening pictures that they saw and people posting specific threats to schools that talk about harming others. Those threats have come in many forms. Some talk about explosives, while others have talked about duplicating what happened in Broward,” Moffett told the Miami Herald.

Police say only one of the threats has resulted in an arrest as of Friday afternoon — a 13-year-old student at Miami Lakes Middle School. Three other threats are still under investigation, while the other were deemed “not credible.”

“So far none of these threats appear to be credible or legitimate, but we do not take a chance. We investigate every single threat,” said Alberto Carvalho, Miami-Dade County Public School superintendent, adding that all of the threats resulted in police involvement at the schools.

Some of the dozens of schools that received threats include Southwest Senior High, Ferguson High, Jorge Mas Canosa Middle School and W.R. Thomas Middle.

On Friday, Hialeah police saturated the area near Hialeah High School after getting a call about a suspicious person carrying a gun.

“Hialeah units also conducted a search of the nearby areas and again did not observe nor locate any suspicious individuals,” police spokesman Edward Rodriguez. “At no time was there a shooting or an active shooter.”

Shortly after, the Miami Herald received a video that showed a school security guard standing on a rooftop at Ronald Reagan High School in Doral. The guard pretended to shoot students on the ground floor, using his hands as pretend gun.

“We've looked into it and we know that it is an employee. We are currently taking action regarding his employment,” Moffett said.

On Thursday, a 12-year-old girl in Davie was arrested after she admitted slipping a note under the assistant principal’s door that said she would kill kids and teachers, police say. Also arrested? A 17-year-old student in Sunrise. Police say Rodriguez posted a selfie on Snapchat threatening to "shoot up" Piper High School.

Shortly after, Hallandale High and Hallandale Beach schools “received threats of a shooting” in an Instagram post, which was ultimately determined to be a false alarm.

The problem isn’t just in South Florida. School districts across the country are battling similar hoaxes.

On Friday, a South Carolina high school student was arrested after posting a photo of himself holding a weapon on Snapchat. The caption? “Round two of Florida”

Always, there is the possibility that a threat is legitimate.

A day before the Douglas High shooting, an 18-year-old in Everett, Washington, was arrested after his grandmother found his journal with entries detailing his plans to shoot classmates at his high school, police say. In the journal, he mentioned planning to use a semiautomatic rifle and homemade explosives.

“Parents have responsibility to know what their children are doing,” Moffett said. “They have the responsibility of being the chief law enforcement officer in their home before they have to come to us and other forms of government to provide them.”
« Last post by knarf on Today at 04:16:28 AM »
"I call this the JustinKase," Justin says of his invention. "You don't want to use it, but just in case you need it, it'll be there."

SOMERSET, Wis. - The flag at Somerset High School flies at half-staff in honor lives lost in Florida.

Inside, Somerset senior Justin Rivard was inspired in his shop class to try to save lives here.

“I call this the JustinKase,” Justin says of his invention. “You don’t want to use it, but just in case you need it, it’ll be there.”

Made of steel plates and connecting rods, Justin’s device slips beneath a classroom door and latches to the door’s jam.

With his device in place, Justin has yet to find a person who can push a classroom door open, including linemen from his high school football team.

“You can lock a door with a lock, it can get shot out,” Justin says. “You can lock a door with this, it can't get shot out. You can't get around it.”

Justin didn’t have to go far for his first big sale. Somerset High School ordered 50 of them, one for every classroom in the building.

“We started with the high school, then went to the middle school, then the elementary school,” says Shannon Donnelly, Somerset’s principal.

Donnelly keeps a JustinKase under her desk as well. She expects everyone in the school to know how to use one.

“We immediately, within a week of having these, went through an entire drill, all throughout the building, really walking through students and staff,” she says.

Justin has already delivered 54 of his devices to the Grantsburg School District, with 40 more on the way.

He knows of at least one company making a similar device, but says his can be put into place faster and costs less.

The JustinKase sells for $95.

Justin is awaiting approval on his patent application.

Eric Olson is the technology and engineering teacher at Somerset High School. He’s not surprised by Justin’s creation.

“He's the special combination of motivation and brains and has a motor that just keeps going,” says Olson.

After graduation this spring, Justin will be turning over his fledgling business to his father. Starting in July, Justin will begin serving his country in the Army.

Justin says he used to wonder how if he would leave an impact at his school. Not anymore.

“My impact is in every room,” he says.
From rising temperatures preventing take-off to rising seas flooding runways, aviation needs to adapt to changes already grounding flights around the world

Last year the air in Pheonix, US was too hot for planes to take off as temperatures rose above 48C.

Phoenix gets hot. But not usually as hot as last June, when the mercury at the airport one day soared above 48C. That exceeded the maximum operating temperature for several aircraft ready for take-off. They didn’t fly. More than 50 flights were cancelled or rerouted.

Thanks to climate change, soon 48C may not seem so unusual. Welcome to the precarious future of aviation in a changing climate. As the world warms and weather becomes more extreme, aircraft designers, airport planners and pilots must all respond, both in the air and on the ground. With about 100,000 flights worldwide carrying eight million passengers every day, this is a big deal.

Why is heat a problem for planes? In a word: lift.

Lift is the upward force created by diverting air around wings as an aircraft moves down the runway. It is harder to achieve when the air is scorching hot, because hot air is thinner than cold air. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) warned in 2016 that as a result, higher temperatures “could have severe consequences for aircraft take-off performance.”

Aircraft will need to jettison passengers, cargo or fuel to get the same lift on a hot day, raising costs and requiring more flights.

“Weight restrictions are likely to have the most effect on long-haul flights, which often take off near the airplane’s maximum weight,” says Ethan Coffel, an atmospheric scientist at Columbia University. “Possible adaptations include rescheduling flights to cooler times of the day or lengthening runways.”

Daytime heat is why long-distance flights out of the Middle East already regularly take off in the cool of the night. But the same will soon apply in the US and southern Europe. That will create problems in places where night and early-morning flights are restricted to help people on the ground sleep.

Future lighter and more fuel-efficient planes will help, says Coffel. But it means the anticipated economic and environmental gains from such advances may be largely offset by coping with warmer air.
Wild rides

Once in the air, flying will feel different too, especially in and around the jet stream, for instance when crossing the Atlantic.

<a href="" target="_blank" class="new_win"></a>

“At cruising altitudes, the north-south temperature difference that drives the jet stream is increasing,” says Paul Williams, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Reading in the UK. Flying east is becoming quicker in the stronger winds that result, but flying west will be slower. Airline schedulers will need to take the altered flight times into consideration in the future – and flyers may need to be prepared for more frustrating airport announcements of delayed incoming flights.

Flights will also be bumpier, says Williams. “Stronger winds will increase the amount of shear in the jet stream,” he says. Shear creates turbulence – particularly what is called “clear-air turbulence,” which occurs away from storm clouds and is hard for pilots to spot and fly round. “The increase in clean-air turbulence has the potential to be quite disruptive,” says Williams. In other words, get used to keeping your seatbelts fastened.
High-altitude icing

Climate change will also increase the number and intensity of thunderstorms, and push them upward into cruising altitudes. That will make flying trickier and could dramatically increase the risk of one of the most worrying upper-air phenomena for pilots: high-altitude icing.

High-altitude ice is a feature of thunderstorms, and it is dangerous. The infiltration of tiny particles of ice into turbofan engines has been blamed for more than 100 engine failures in recent years.

In the most notorious high-altitude icing accident, an Air France flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris in 2009 crashed, killing all aboard, when it stalled after the autopilot disconnected when ice crystals disabled its speed sensors.

Officials of the European Aviation Safety Agency have blamed climate change – along with the failure of aircraft designers to reassess the risks – for the growing frequency of engine failures and other faults due to high-altitude icing. Worryingly, modern energy-efficient lean-burn engines may be more susceptible, Herbert Puempel, an aviation expert at the World Meteorological Organization, warned in the group’s journal.
On the ground

Some of the most expensive climate-change problems for the aviation industry will be on the ground. That’s because many runways are in places they really shouldn’t be.

Take Iqaluit airport in northern Canada. The permafrost on which it was built is melting. The runway and taxiway have had to be resurfaced as a result. And the melting is deepening.

There will be other such cases. But a more frequent problem is likely to be flooding. Many airports are built on flat, low-lying land, by the ocean or in drained swamps. Such places can be hard to drain and vulnerable to rising sea levels and more intense storms.

When Superstorm Sandy hit New York City in 2012, a storm surge 12ft high inundated the runways of LaGuardia, closing the airport for three days. A tropical storm hitting so far north is widely regarded as an effect of climate change. So expect more such extreme weather.

LaGuardia certainly is. Two-and-a-half years after Sandy struck, New York governor Andrew Cuomo put aside $28m to install new flood barriers and drains at the airport.

Sandy was a wake-up call. A federal climate assessment subsequently found 13 major US airports at similar risk, from Honolulu to Miami. Included in the list are San Francisco and Oakland airports, both built on low-lying reclaimed land along the shore of San Francisco Bay.

Civilian airport authorities have been slow to address the issue, but the US military is more proactive. A Pentagon analysis of climate-related risk to military infrastructure, published in January this year, gave pride of place to threats to airfields from sea level rise, storms and high temperatures.

Internationally, there is also rising concern. The scientific consensus is that sea level rise probably won’t be more than one metre this century. But airport authorities believe that they must adapt to much higher waters during storm surges such as that experienced at LaGuardia.

Singapore’s Changi airport, one of the world’s busiest, is raising its new passenger terminal 5.5m above sea level as a precaution against future storm tides. Hong Kong is constructing a wall, eight miles (13km) long, around a new runway.

By those standards, dozens of the world’s great airports should be thinking about runway protection. Bangkok, Schiphol in the Netherlands, Sydney, both airports in Shanghai, London City airport and Kansai near Osaka all fall short.

Maybe more radical solutions are required. Back in the 1990s, Japan built a 1km floating airstrip in Tokyo Bay as a “scale model” for a full-size floating airport that could rise with the tides.

Whether the threat is too much heat for take-off, too much ice to stay in the air or too much water to land, most airports and airlines are approaching climate change as a problem they will address as it arises. But the stark truth, says Coffel, is that the future is now.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10