Jasun horsley, socio-spiritual engineering 392 page 8 skeptiko electricity units to kwh

###########

According to a Reason Foundation study, another flaw in forest management is a systematic reduction in timber removal. electricity units calculator in pakistan This began in 1990 when the spotted owl was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. In response, the Forest Service placed restrictions on timber harvests. Additionally, President Bill Clinton introduced a rule that restricted the construction of new roads on 49 million acres of national forest. This limited the ability of the Forest Service from thinning trees. In 1993, 1,797,574 acres of wildlands burned, but in 2017 this number jumped to 10,026,086 acres.

To prevent fires, both the California’s state government and the federal government need to deregulate logging and encourage the Forest Service to make a profit by selling timber. Until the environmental protests of the 1970s, the Forest Service was one of the only departments in the federal government making a profit. gas leak chicago It is a myth that environmental concerns and business interests are always at odds. In the case of California’s forests, thinning the trees is in the interests of both parties.

Ironically, these ill-conceived environmental policies designed to ward off climate change have been the source of massive amounts of carbon dioxide pollution. A forest fire’s initial blaze releases 5.2. million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions, according to Forest Service ecologist Leland Tarnay. This is equivalent to the amount of emissions from 1.1 million passenger cars in a year."​

Click to expand…Usually when a statistically meaningful number is given by scientists they also provide a margin of error or confidence interval for example.056 +/- .02 could mean there is a 90% probability the true value is somewhere between .054 and .058. gas 89 Often journalists omit the margin of error. Sometimes it is omitted deliberately to hide the uncertainty in a scientific result.

A fraction of a degree in temperature could make a different because over time many small changes could add up to several degrees which could cause changes in climate. Or since very hot weather can result in deaths, if the average temperature goes up a little bit because there are a few more very hot days, it could be important because the number of deaths increases.

Small measurements are important in science because life can only exist in a very narrow range of values of the physical characteristics of nature. Gravity, temperature, radiation, pressure, etc all of these factors could theoretically be much higher or lower than we experience on earth, but the range needed for life, particularly intelligent life, is very narrow.

Click to expand…Hi Jim. I kinda get this, but surely that narrow range isn’t a case of critical measures such that a degree, or a fraction thereof, makes a vital difference. Of course I get that there are situations where one degree more hits fail line. electricity worksheets But here’s a point – when an official temperature measuring station records, say 40 degrees C the actual temperatures experienced by people might be as high as 50+ degrees C – depending on the location. gas house gang In Australia official temperature measures are taken in a covered box with slatted sides. A person standing beside the box in full sun will experience a much higher temperature. So when we were told that Penrith had a temperature of 43 degrees C last summer all that meant was that it was 43 degrees C at the point of controlled and standardised measuring. In winter I record temperatures 5 or more degrees cooler than the official recorder for my district. I have had snow in my back garden while in the front all the snow melted days ago – and on days when the official temperature is around 4 degrees.

So I can deal with the fact that sensitive standardised measuring systems will record a temperature that can be used to make statistical records. What I don’t understand is (a) whether there is a verifiable uniform global standard that assures all temperatures measures used to develop a global model have equal integrity, and (b) how, if the temperature inside the standard measuring station is not the same immediately outside it, how any specific measure can be claimed to be an actual, as opposed to a statistical, measure. gas x coupon 2014 I am not disputing that measures taken globally in a uniformly standard way can provide critical information about temperature variations, and may point to something we need to heed.

I have not the slightest doubt that our climate is changing. Summers are getting hotter, here, and winters are getting milder. gas what i smoke I am just not comfortable that the measures provided are real – and that is mostly a function of ignorance about how the measures are taken. I am, consequently, just as uncomfortable with the ‘propaganda’ that goes with the measurement. Because of my professional background I have a justifiable skepticism when statistical data is interpreted – because the interpretations are frequently wrong and often skewed by ideological positions. I don’t know enough about climate science to evaluate the data, but I know enough about human behaviour to be wary of accepting the dominant interpretation.

In short, I have no bloody idea whether the claims about ‘climate change’ are right, and I have no motive to lean one way or the other. I am not persuaded by the ‘moral’ argument, or the political and economic one. There is, so far as I can determine, no actual scientific argument – at least, if there is, it has managed to successfully elude me. k electric company There are arguments that are based on science, and they may be right. But the reality is that complex climate science has not been distilled into an ‘idiot’s guide’ and the arguments are not essentially different from theological ones that finally demand faith and belief – and I have neither.