30 August 2012

A Thursday Round-Up


It has been a busy week here with the start of the fall semester. Below are a few items that I did not have time to get to, and a few that are in the queue. To get your holiday weekend off to a peppy start, above is a music video from Fun (and I am told that the lead signer is not a moonlighting Michael Shellenberger, though I'm not so sure.)

Enjoy and have a nice holiday weekend!

9 comments:

  1. The University of Colorado - where all the students are above average. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the link to pallets.. great history of a humble product!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ==]] However, when Rapley cites some of the prominent climate science/advocacy websites as venues for possible progress, he is apparently unaware that they typically see Sarewitz and I (mostly me, Dan doesn't blog) as the enemy. [[==

    Really? "The" enemy? Persecution complex much?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sadly Joshua, Roger is on the money on this one. The Team are quite clear that Roger is an enemy.

    A few minutes searching turns up plenty, especially from Joe Romm.

    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/06/22/204047/roger-pielke-jr-denier-john-tierney-link-climate-change-extreme-weather/

    http://grist.org/article/the-blind-leading-quoting-the-blind/

    http://www.desmogblog.com/lies-damn-lies-and-climate-change-denial

    You act like he is one to you as well, always with the sniping. But you are such a committed troll that you can't even bear to admit that he is a serious bugbear to the uber-alarmists.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mark -

    It seems to me that Roger likes to mix it up. For example, I recently read a thread where he referred to "climate hawks" as "climate chickens." So it isn't terribly surprising that he's not universally well-liked, and no doubt, there's quite few folks out there who don't like Roger very much. That seems clear.

    But none of your links support his claim that he is "typically" viewed as "the enemy." (Notice how you, yourself, felt compelled to change "the enemy" to "an enemy" to make his comment easier to defend.)

    And your belief that I "act like" he's also an "enemy" to me can't really be questioned. Your belief is your belief. But your belief is entirely incorrect.

    Maybe Roger's claim was just a tad, maybe a smidgeon, over the top?

    ReplyDelete
  6. -Joshua, Mark-

    Please, no more of this here. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Do you think we are at the start of a great stagnation? That productivity gains have been exhausted? That growth is over? I have one word for you. Pallets."

    I have one word for you. Human Brain Equivalents. Well, three words. One phrase. Which symbolizes two concepts. (Is everyone following this?)

    First of all, human brains are what create wealth. They are what create economic growth. That is why the world per-capita GDP growth rate has increased in every 50-year period, from 1700 to 2000 (per Brad DeLong):

    Time period...Percent Annual Per Capita GDP Growth

    1700-1750.......................0.16
    1750-1800.......................0.18
    1800-1850.......................0.87
    1850-1900.......................1.65
    1900-1950.......................1.76
    1950-2000.......................2.83

    If one simply extrapolates the trend from 1800 onward, one gets a prediction that the world per-capita economic growth rate (adjusted for inflation) for the 21st century will average 3.39 percent.

    http://markbahner.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/per_capita_gdp_growth_1650_on_rev1_1.JPG

    However, the second point is that computers will add much more to the "population" of "human brain equivalents" in the near future.

    Per my calculations, computers added only 1 human brain equivalent (HBE) in 1996, and only 1000 HBEs in 2006. And they will add only 1 million HBEs in 2016. But by 2024 they will add 1 BILLION HBEs. And by 2033, 1 TRILLION HBEs.

    http://markbahner.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/annual_computer_power_additions.JPG

    So I predict that world per-capita GDPs will be increasing routinely at above 5% per year even within the next 1-2 decades.

    http://markbahner.typepad.com/random_thoughts/2004/10/3rd_thoughts_on.html

    Viewed from 2040, we will see that real economic growth has not stopped. From 2040 (only 28 years from now), it will be viewed that real economic growth had not even started by 2012.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The pallet article was fun thanks

    ReplyDelete