Some interesting sociological results. I find the word “friend” for Facebook acquaintances annoying.
The New State Of Jefferson
I’ve got three of the six states up @Ricochet, but they’re behind the paywall, so I’m going to republish here. First up is Jefferson.
Global Warming
The statistical meltdown:
The sensitivity of the climate to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide is a central question in the debate on the appropriate policy response to increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Climate sensitivity and estimates of its uncertainty are key inputs into the economic models that drive cost-benefit analyses and estimates of the social cost of carbon.
Continuing to rely on climate-model warming projections based on high, model-derived values of climate sensitivity skews the cost-benefit analyses and estimates of the social cost of carbon. This can bias policy decisions. The implications of the lower values of climate sensitivity in our paper, as well as similar other recent studies, is that human-caused warming near the end of the 21st century should be less than the 2-degrees-Celsius “danger” level for all but the IPCC’s most extreme emission scenario.
That’s the wrong answer. It doesn’t justify ending capitalism.
XCOR’s Approach To Space
Speaking of Stewart Money, he has a nice post, comparing and contrasting Virgin, XCOR and SpaceX.
About That Mars One MIT Study
Some thoughts from Stewart Money, with which I agree:
While presented as a legitimate concern, $4.5 billion is after all a large sum of money, and a very tall hurdle to overcome, it still leads to an interesting counterpoint which the authors of the NASA funded study do not address. NASA is well on the way to spending $16 billion to get the Orion capsule alone through one crewed flight, a number which excludes the development costs of the Space Launch System as well as its ground infrastructure. The agency cannot even begin to put a price tag on gong to Mars. It would be interesting to see the same team run the numbers on that.
There is no doubt that Mars One is [a] risky concept, and if it is to ever gain real traction, it will have to endure a lot more scrutiny than presented in the MIT study. It should probably begin with a clear statement that Mars One is meant as an evolving concept, in which the final product may differ considerable [sic] from what has initially been put forward on a time frame which like all space projects, is subject to change. At the same time, its many critics might want to at least consider how much of the risk to any future Mars mission, whether one way of with a return ticket, could be reduced through advancing the Technological Readiness Level (TRL) of some of the core technologies the MIT team identifies.
Finally, they might want to ask why the U.S. is committed to a very different, but perhaps even more financially implausible plan.
Yes.
[Update a few minutes later]
By the way, Bas Lansdorp has responded in comments over at Marcia Smith’s place.
Twelve Technologies We Need To Get Going On
A list, at io9.
Not sure about either the space elevator or space solar. And he leaves off a gravity lab, which we need to understand if or how we can properly conceive and gestate in partial gravity.
The Ebola Outbreak
Here’s an excellent story at the WaPo, from Joel Achenbach and others, about how it happened.
America’s Shale Boom
Has changed the energy landscape.
Of course, stupidly, California isn’t participating. As I’ll discuss in my ongoing series of the six Califorias, the Monterey Shale holds the solution to both the state’s energy and water problems, but the moron electorate in the Bay Area and LA won’t let it happen.
What Else Have They Been Covering Up?
Peter Suderman asks an excellent question:
The administration had evidence indicating that a young advance team member, who was also the child of a lobbyist-and-donor-turned-administration-staffer, was involved in a potentially embarrassing incident with a prostitute while serving as a member of the presidential advance team—and yet explicitly denied that this was the case, and also appears to have pressured independent investigators to delay and withhold evidence until after the election was over.
And the question the story raises is: If the White House was so determined to cover up this embarassing but relatively minor incident, what larger stories has the White House suppressed or covered up that we don’t know about?
Yes. And that doesn’t even count the ones that we do know about.
It’s in fact similar to the question I asked about Penn State that resulted in Michael Mann suing me.
[Update a few minutes later]
Why the Columbia prostitute scandal matters:
More than sex, the story is about nepotism, favoritism, credibility, and the president’s safety.
Yes, it sort of encapsulates the depths of hypocrisy, criminality and corruption of “the most transparent administration in history.”
The President’s Emotional State
Obama become paranoid, and Nixonian.