The Weird, Random, and Interesting things that Fit Nowhere Else Thread

[Guard Dog]

There is something else everyone seems to be missing here. The Paris "Agreement" places statutory requirements on the United States with provisions for punitive actions. That is a treaty. Treaties are supposed to be ratified by 2/3 of the United States Senate. His Excellency Premier Obama did no even allow that to happen. He just signed us up. So while everyone is hyperventilating and going batsht crazy about this it's worth remembering since this was never ratified we were never actually IN any kind of agreement.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

Double post

Edited June 2, 2017 by Guard Dog

[Wrath of Dagon]

More proof the Paris Accord was just a plot to hobble US industry: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange-german-carmakers-idUSKBN18T1Q0?il=0

 

Edit:

There is something else everyone seems to be missing here. The Paris "Agreement" places statutory requirements on the United States with provisions for punitive actions. That is a treaty. Treaties are supposed to be ratified by 2/3 of the United States Senate. His Excellency Premier Obama did no even allow that to happen. He just signed us up. So while everyone is hyperventilating and going batsht crazy about this it's worth remembering since this was never ratified we were never actually IN any kind of agreement.

A President can make agreements on behalf of the US, and it is binding in the eyes of the international community, but not under US law. So anything the government wanted to do under that agreement they would still have to pass a regulation or a law to implement. Edited June 2, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[pmp10]

And isn't the Paris agreement a bunch of symbolic BS which will never be complied with by anyone anyway?

No, it's objectives may be political and unenforceable but it was supposed to show intent of flighting global warming.

 

World pledges to save "mother Earth".

 

See, everything's cool.

 

 

 

The World Meteorological Organization estimated that U.S. withdrawal from the emissions-cutting accord could add 0.3 degrees Celsius to global temperatures by the end of the century in a worst-case scenario.

 

0.3 degrees in the next 87 years! We think! Oh noes!

The agreement was far more important in setting trends. The target numbers were pulled out of the ass anyway.

US is not just a major polluter but also technological leader and the only developed country expected to keep growing it's population.

And for all we know this may set a precedent and turn it into another Kyoto.

Edited June 3, 2017 by pmp10

[Gfted1]

Rereading my statement I realize just how wrong I was. The end of the century is in 83 years, not 87. I wear ribbons of shame.   

 

Is China not considered a "developed" country? What about India? Cause those two countries alone represent ~1/3 of the global population.

[BruceVC]

 

I've never understood the need to split hairs over environmental concerns. We should be constantly pushing for cleaner energy because it is the smartest long term decision.

It's not about clean energy. It's about political power. It's about money. Even if you accept that 100% of the worst assumptions about human induced climate change are true what we are really seeing are cynical attempts to exploit the problem to seize political power or "level" the economic playing field. 

 

Who are you referring to when you say people want to seize political power and level the economic playing field ?

[Malcador]

Rereading my statement I realize just how wrong I was. The end of the century is in 83 years, not 87. I wear ribbons of shame.

 

Is China not considered a "developed" country? What about India? Cause those two countries alone represent ~1/3 of the global population.

Doubt either of them is. India at least has significant poverty.

[Gfted1]

Doubt either of them is. India at least has significant poverty.

Huh, I just checked and youre right. Both are only considered High (Developing) category. I'm pretty shocked and thought at least China would have been considered a "developed country".

[Gromnir]

 

the question o' how much impact humans have on global temperatures is worthy o' enlightened debate.  however, your sneer is perplexing 'cause o' the way you phrase your quip.

 

a couple degrees IS a big deal.  period. IF one nation alone were to be responsible for a .3 degree change in 87 years, that would be significant.  such a point is not actual subjective or part o' the debate.  whether is human activity which is responsible for the change is where experts disagree... although increasing few seem to be dismissive o' the human factor.  

 

no, a two degree change will not result in the end o' all life on the planet, but is gonna result in drastic changes for humans. wanna argue that the so-called experts is simple guessing 'bout the 'mount o' impact the USA would have on global temperatures increase or that human action is a main driver o' temp increases?  okie dokie.  regardless, am admitted baffled by the folks who see a numbers like .3 in 87 years and seem to think such a change is laughable or negligible. unclear-on-the-concept reveal.

 

HA! Good Fun!

I suppose part of my objection is the pulling of numbers out of asses. Planet climate is a terrifically complicated matter that we do not come close to fully understanding yet. Then that lack of knowledge is used to create echo chambers and panicky declarations (even when the statement itself says "worst case scenario"). What? There is absolutely no way to prove that statement.

 

am agreeing in part.  .3 degrees is representing a massive impact, but there must needs be guesswork to determine how much change would occur for the next 87 years with Paris v. w/o.  assuming current rates w/o matching Paris promises is gonna be fundamental flawed, no?  is far too simplistic.  is not easy math and kinda feels as if these meteorologists pulled a worst-case scenario outta their arses.

 

even so, the .3 degrees in 87 years is scary big.  is +.3 simple for not staying with Paris. is s'posed to be shockingly large number rather than dismissed 'cause is insignificant.

 

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-America-stacks-up-greenhouse-gas-emissions-180963560/

 

is not per capita totals shown in the linked article.  folks here wanna self-applaud for steps US has already taken at reduction?  fine, but US is still contributing more per capita than just 'bout anybody, and more total than anybody save china.  

 

is kinda like dieting, no?  mindy, cheryl and pam all go on a diet.  mindy loses 10 pounds. cheryl loses 7 pounds and pam loses 4.  have mindy brag 'bout her weight loss compared to the other two ladies is ridiculous when you realize mindy started out at 350lb  while cheryl and pam were closer to 130.  mindy needs to burn off a few more pounds 'fore she can start bragging or getting complacent 'bout diets.  

 

even so, am agreeing much o' the science is speculative.  our issue were the curious way gifted criticized.  the meteorologists attempted to scare gifted with a crazy-big and scary number given mere decades o' time.  weird reaction from gifted.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

This decision by Trump was the wrong one because he didnt have to actually make it, there wasn't  really a rationale justification to keep this particular campaign promise. Some people who support this decision, like Nigel Farage, say Trump should be credited for " actually delivering on campaign promises unlike other Western leaders " .......sounds fair except for the fact Trump has ignored several campaign promises where prudent 

 

It appears his popularity ratings are only now dropping but until recently stayed at the same level more or less 

 

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-latest-approval-rating-drops-support-among-diehard-backers-618492

 

Many of his supporters have stayed loyal to him since his initial hyperbole and populism, they 

 

• dont care if he cant support what he says
• are fine with very unorthodox ways he operates like using Twitter 
• don't care if he sticks to specific promises
• ignore all media or rather any anti-Trump media
• seem to really believe Trump is beyond reproach and will redeem and fix what they perceive is wrong with the USA
• arent concerned if what Trump says will harm the USA in an economic sense....
• many truly believe Trump is the savior of white Americans .....( I honestly didn't think white Americans needed to be saved )

Trump could literally say " my supporters are morons and misguided "  and it wont stop them supporting him 

 

So why would he follow through on this campaign promise when most of corporate USA, majority of energy companies and many of his closest advisors advised him not to?

 

I dont know if the science of global warming is true or not, I leave that up to people who have more information

 

But the most important and strongest economies of the world are behind the Paris accord, as usual this decision caused an immediate but expected dichotomous split in the global media and normal Trump commentary

 

People who dont like Trump resort to hyperbole like " is this the end of the USA as leader of the world, will China and India now lead the way for the global community "

 

   This type of comment really made me laugh, why would we suddenly think either China or India could suddenly become what the USA is in the global community ....no offense to either country but 

 

• China : They dont have the economic resources, ethical compass, social inclination, real interest or relationships to do this. You cant possibly think a country that is busy trying to recreate its own economy can somehow guide the world

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-03/05/c_136103096.htm

• India :  I like India and they are the only  economic success in BRICS. But there economic transformation is based on how they have become a global outsourcing and stable investment hub for many countries.....why would they want to lead the world in any way outside what they now doing ?

 

And people supporting Trumps decision claim this is going to save US jobs? I am missing this one, how would this be realistic ?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html

Edited June 3, 2017 by BruceVC

[Gfted1]

Places in the US that took in more immigrants in the 19th century still benefit economically from it.

 

I cant speak for "Quartz Media", so take it as you will.

[BruceVC]

Places in the US that took in more immigrants in the 19th century still benefit economically from it.

 

I cant speak for "Quartz Media", so take it as you will.

Gfted1 how do you personally feel about the USA leaving the Paris Accord?

 

I am looking for some anecdotal comments from normal, tax paying citizens ?

[Gfted1]

Gfted1 how do you personally feel about the USA leaving the Paris Accord?

 

I am looking for some anecdotal comments from normal, tax paying citizens ?

Conceptually: Sure, we should all be looking for and enforcing ways to reduce harmful emissions. Its just common sense.

 

Realistically: I'm a bit meh. I don't like the Chicken Little approach to anything and I think our lack of knowledge on the matter is significant. But hey, stuff is melting so we should do something sooner rather than later to mitigate the effects.

[BruceVC]

 

Gfted1 how do you personally feel about the USA leaving the Paris Accord?

 

I am looking for some anecdotal comments from normal, tax paying citizens ?

Conceptually: Sure, we should all be looking for and enforcing ways to reduce harmful emissions. Its just common sense.

 

Realistically: I'm a bit meh. I don't like the Chicken Little approach to anything and I think our lack of knowledge on the matter is significant. But hey, stuff is melting so we should do something sooner rather than later to mitigate the effects.

 

You make certain  points in a way that is exactly what I cant articulate yet when you say it I agree

 

I want to tell you something else I would think  probably doesnt matter to you but after this last election in the USA I had to fundamentally relook and redefine my view around SJ and what matters to achieve  a more equitable society . I am a better person from this change and some comments you and other members have made through the years came back to me

 

I am not saying I have changed certain views because of you specifically and now I want you to think Im a better person, this is about something that I somehow ignored and now that I see where I was going wrong its been beneficial to me and my overall perception on what makes a better overall society 

 

But I must give you and other members recognition  even though I know you dont  want it or expect it, I am going to make a separate post about this. If you have time and inclination please comment

[Raithe]

Children now face fines if they don't get a permit to mow grass for money

 

Edit: And yes, I know it's like a town of 14,000 or so and not widespread across America, but it's still a mixture of blink and eye roll over it happening.

Edited June 3, 2017 by Raithe

[Malcador]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/05/531584651/alex-honnold-scales-el-capitan-without-ropes-and-the-climbing-world-reels 

 

 

First free solo climb of El Capitan

Edited June 5, 2017 by Malcador

[Raithe]

For a report from last year... Scientists explain the ultimate earworm and what makes songs addictive

 

 

 

Scientists at the University of St Andrews have named the Top 20 official earworms in a study as to what makes songs addictive.

The team of researchers at the university’s School of Philosophical, Anthropological and Film Studies also developed a mathematical formula for explaining what makes an earworm.

 

Researcher Bede Williams said an earworm needs five key components: surprise, predictability, rhythmic repetition, melodic potency and receptiveness (how the listener feels about the song).

The formula is expressed as Receptiveness + (predictability-surprise) + (melodic potency) + (rhythmic repetition x1.5) = earworm. The most addictive earworm was named as Queen’s ‘We Will Rock You’, with the band having three songs in the Top 20 alongside ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ and ‘We Are The Champions’. ‘Jingle Bells’ was the oldest song in the list.

In no way casting doubt on the research, the study was carried out for Heinz’s new #cansongs TV advert.

MPU 1 (Desktop / Tablet)

 

Williams said: “If you look at the songs which emerged from the research, they all have a distinctive rhythmic fingerprint. If we remove the melody, they’re still recognisable by their rhythm alone.”

 

 

The Top 20 earworms named by the University of St Andrews are:
1) Queen – ‘We Will Rock You’
2) Pharrell Williams – ‘Happy’
3) Queen – ‘We Are The Champions’
4) The Proclaimers – ‘I’m Gonna Be (500 Miles)’
5) The Village People – ‘YMCA’
6) Queen – ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’
7) Europe – ‘The Final Countdown’
Bon Jovi – ‘Livin’ On A Prayer’

9) James Pierpoint – ‘Jingle Bells’
10) Baha Men – ‘Who Let The Dogs Out?’
11) Psy – ‘Gangnam Style’
12) Rick Astley – ‘Never Gonna Give You Up’
13) Journey – ‘Don’t Stop Believin’
14) Mark Ronson – ‘Uptown Funk’
15) Taylor Swift – ‘Shake It Off’
16) Michael Jackson – ‘Beat It’
17) Kaiser Chiefs – ‘Ruby’
18) The Rocky Horror Show – ‘The Timewarp’
19) Meghan Trainor – ‘All About The Bass’
20) Culture Club – ‘Karma Chameleon’

Edited June 6, 2017 by Raithe

[ShadySands]

[Guard Dog]

Battlestar Galactica cast reunites: http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/11/entertainment/battlestar-galactica-cast-reunion/index.html

 

[rjshae]

Here's a crowdsourcing challenge: help astronomers find Planet X

 

https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/marckuchner/backyard-worlds-planet-9/classify

 

I've done a few dozen so far. You need decent vision to catch the differences.

[Gfted1]

Two-Headed Porpoise Just Wants Love, Validation.

[rjshae]

Two-Headed Porpoise Just Wants Love, Validation.

 

It had to be physically painful, giving birth to that poor fellow.

[Gromnir]

 

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/rules-about-how-to-address-us-flag-came-about-because-no-one-wanted-to-look-like-a-nazi-180960100/

 

HA! Good Fun!

[SonicMage117]

Oh my... oh dear.

[Wrath of Dagon]

From the annals of American badassery, home owner captures two desperate murderers: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/16/hero-homeowner-holds-escaped-georgia-inmates-at-gunpoint-until-arrests.html