|
Post by karlox on Feb 23, 2010 8:36:25 GMT
I am worried and scared of how radicalist, extremist and fundamentalist, opposition to Obama is becoming... Our system is most endangered by Obama. We don't want Marxism, socialism, communism, fascism. That's what puts our system in danger. We want Constitutionalism! Have you even watched the YouTubes on our system? It's called Overview of America. Comes in 4 parts but is only 29minutes over all. It might help you understand why we are so against Obama. scpg02, thanks for the videos, I´ll go through all of them to try to understand your point of view. If only I would say that since Obama was put there by his voters -meaning millions, as it was for any other Presidents, would that mean that half the USA´s citizens became communist or what? I ´d suppose that you would also assume that the approval of different laws restraining public liberties for the sake of National Security (Terrorist scare) during past Administration was a serious threat for the individuals rights and liberties as well... Nope? Perh
|
|
jtom
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 248
|
Post by jtom on Feb 23, 2010 13:21:05 GMT
Don't know what politics you have where you are, but here what a politician claims in order to be elected quite often does not match what he does once in office. That is the case with Obama. That he has attempted to convert the US to a European-style socialism is not a reflection of the wishes of the voters but of his own duplicity in attaining office.
This country allowed the previous administration generous latitude in fighting terrorism. What makes this country different from most others is our 'checks and balances'; if they abuse the law, we will change the law and remove those who fostered the abuse. I've seen this 'abuse it and lose it' action done at all levels of government. As far as I know, the government has only used their expanded powers to disrupt terrorism. Does anyone know of any abusive use of the Patriot Act?
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Feb 23, 2010 15:10:21 GMT
Does anyone know of any abusive use of the Patriot Act? Yes I've heard a few stories. There was a guy in the Pacific NW that was held without bail etc. Turns out he was completely innocent of anything. Didn't stop them from violating his rights. BTW, the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and substituted for the congressional bill at the last minute. A vote was required without having read the bill. Did you hear that the newly elected "conservative" Scott Brown crossed party lines to vote for the jobs bill?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 24, 2010 3:16:20 GMT
"- this is certainly what Global Warming is meant to be: droughts and floodings, severe hot and cold weather, black and white, up and down...depending on where and when etc."This is actually what happens when the polar vortex extends south forcing the weather that makes up the Ferrel cells to run through the Iberian peninsula instead of Scotland. The question that needs to be asked is why has the polar vortex shifted - and that may well be due to unexpected changes in the stratosphere. The patterns that we became used to in the 'satellite era' have changed - this is why the weather forecasters are having so much difficulty and why their models are not working. Certainly Nautonnier, these are the ´mechanics´ lying behind and explaining what´s happening now -you were very nice, patient and didactic explaining that to me in a different post- but what´s happening now has happened before during our ´satellite era´and presumably it´s been so for ages... Please take a look at: www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao.timeseries.gifGraphs running from 1950 through 2010, this Historic NAO series are arbitrarily split fo a more convenient ´look´and presentation (four graphs covering 15 years each). One doesn´t need complex maths to see how last graph (1995-2010) looks more like first starting graph (1950-1964) than alike previous one (1980-1995). In short: negative NAO index (in blue) seems to prevail except for 1982-1995, so I can´t really see patterns have changed, as you say, and though our technology is far better now than in the 50´s I suppose it´s not that difficult to compare old weather data, reports and observations from the past toh what we´re observing now during this prevailing ´negative´ AO and NAO index cycle, and by ´now´ I mean not only this crazy winter, but many others in the last 15 years... What do you think about this? May I be missing something? If you go to www.accuweather.com you can look at Joe Bastardi's European Blog www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.aspJoe Bastardi is the son of a weather forecaster and lives eats and sleeps weather. He does look back into patterns of the 1930's and so on identifying similarities that allowed him to forecast the bad weather that Europe is having now. He forecast the drop in Atlantic hurricanes etc etc. All of forecasting is based on pattern matching. As technology has improved instead of counting berries on trees and dates of animals hibernating, forecasters have moved to looking at patterns in satellite imagery, water vapor concentrations, complete gridded atmosphere analyses with points 40km apart with temperature, humidity, winds, etc etc. But its still patterns and the matching is done by software - but the software was designed by forecasters who effectively put the observed pattern rules into the software that if X and Y then A and B will occur. When you work with forecasters some will accept what 'the computer' has told them others will adjust the forecast in the light of their pattern experience. In forecasting this is seen as a 'confidence' level in the forecast - it is a Bayesian probability based on the forecaster's belief in the automated forecast. But as with all areas of modern life more and more forecasters trust the machine and its pattern matching as the easy way out. The atmosphere is mathematically chaotic, this does not mean that there are not patterns its just that the viewpoint for identifying the patterns may need to be altered ( look at Poincaré sections ) So for a short period observed patterns may repeat then for no apparent reason alter. Some of these chaotic patterns are common others rarely occur, or do not often occur with others in certain states. So the Earth spends most of its time in a glacial ice age mode (in chaos theory a 'strong attractor') then some changes of state or small forces occur - and the Earth warms out of the ice age toward a weaker attractor set of states resulting in a brief inter-glacial period. Inside this current interglacial there are patterns and phases in the climate and weather - some very long scales others short - together they can appear to be chaotic noise. Eventually, the right trigger will occur - and the climate will move back to the strong attractor of the ice age state. Humans spend all their time looking for patterns and cause and effect, but in chaotic systems these patterns may not be apparent and the cause for changes may be a very small unlikely change but at _just_ the _right_ time..... hence the debate over the so called 'butterfly effect'. Science has recently gained the capability to collect almost all the data on what is happening from galactic level down to variations in atmosphere, soil and seawater and photons affects on molecules. But turning this data into information on what will happen next results into a return into pattern matching - more complex pattern matching. You can only match patterns if you have seen them before - and to see previous patterns that are more than two or three centuries old science is reduced to using 'proxies' for the values needed. Proxies need interpretation and some work others don't. So there is a temptation to choose the proxy that provides a recognizable pattern that fits with what the researcher 'expects'. The problem is that patterns can be misconstrued - e.g. the correlation not causation or common causation issues debated so hotly here. So what we have now is 'science' largely limiting itself to 'the satellite era' as lots of high quality data is available. Almost certainly patterns will not be simple linear effects and the patterns in the chaos may not be apparent unless the date is considered over centuries. But the data from that far in the past is vague and misleading and requires climatologists to work with biologists, geologists, physicists and chemists trying to obtain information from proxy data that may really not be there. It was the discovery that the tree-ring proxies did not actually act as proxies for temperature that caused the 'hide the decline' panic in the University of East Anglia - all the patterns they had extrapolated from the past were now in question. It can be difficult for some of these researchers to admit that they / we just don't know what happened in the past and why it happened in sufficient detail to forecast what is likely in the future. Some of the climate models being run now are extremely complex, but they just extrapolate the pattern assumptions of the researchers forward and the chaotic climate system so far has refused to follow expectations. Keep observing what actually happens as we are watching new patterns in much more detail than in the past. Will we get sufficient understanding to forecast the next decades? Some people are convinced this is possible - I am not so sure. I hope that was not too rambling a response
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Feb 24, 2010 18:39:11 GMT
Don't know what politics you have where you are, but here what a politician claims in order to be elected quite often does not match what he does once in office. That is the case with Obama. That he has attempted to convert the US to a European-style socialism is not a reflection of the wishes of the voters but of his own duplicity in attaining office. This country allowed the previous administration generous latitude in fighting terrorism. What makes this country different from most others is our 'checks and balances'; if they abuse the law, we will change the law and remove those who fostered the abuse. I've seen this 'abuse it and lose it' action done at all levels of government. As far as I know, the government has only used their expanded powers to disrupt terrorism. Does anyone know of any abusive use of the Patriot Act? Hi jtom! here in Spain we are under the rule of a ´terrible´ Spanish Socialist Worker´s Party (Partido Socialista Obrero Español), which ran for being re-elected and succeeded!! Amazing! It´s really disgusting... there is a common saying here -half joking half serious, depending on whom is saying it, that goes: "With Franco we used to live better" or, otherwise, "Against Franco we used to live better" (hope literal translation is meaningful enough, sorry for I am not a native english speaker). European Socialism.... ummmm... it really sounds terrible and scaring... like pro AGW people and taxes rise... at least! Indeed I was raised under Franco´s Regime -which for the sake of anti-communism (social-democray was not a target by that time, not sure about now according to some comments posted here); he (Franco), for the sake of anticommunism blah blah blah... supported Hitler and he even sent spanish ´volunteers´ troops ( including a handull of Spanish defeated Republican prisoners, which- once ´converted´to the ´right cause´ ´volunteered´to fight Communist Russia, joining thus Nazi´s Cruisade against Stalin)... well, as I was saying he -Franco- was a really nice guy, wasn´t he? This nice fellow I am talking about eventually became a good friend of USA Goverments... or viceversa?... not sure... anyway, he got sufficient support -for the sake of freedom, anti communism etc- as to keep on ruling Spain -until 1974 , when he just died (Obama didn´t kill him, ´neither Presiden Nixon, to my knowledge) For sure we had no free elections -from 1936 to 1975- nor free press, nor civil rights, nor divorce, nor nothing... but it was probably to avoid the risk of falling under what you call European Socialism... so I should probably be gratefull to President Eisenhower til President Nixon which gladly supported this nice Generalissimo Franco... for the sake of Freedom, low taxes blah blah blah... ;D Seriously, What do yo mean by European Socialism? Guantanamo is what really scares many Europeans and many Americans too! Ps: I am not -currently- a Socialist Party voter here in Spain, which I could freely be... just to let you know... and I regard myself as a USA-freak and friend, be sure of that!
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Feb 24, 2010 19:25:37 GMT
Hola, Carlos. Most Americans who use the term "European socialism" have no clue about what they are talking about. Most of the "socialist governments" are not socialist by definition. They only tax like socialist governments, and their police and other people control mechanisms are modeled on various fascist regimes of the pre-1945 era.
Your comment about Guantanamo is interesting. Many of my European amigos have expressed concern about it. But the number of prisoners at Guantanamo are necessarily limited. Americans are afraid of Obama's friend Alcee Hastings plan to turn many of our closed military bases into concentration camps with the capability to hold hundreds of thousands if not millions.
Whether those will actually be gigantic Gitmos; "reeducation camps" on the Chinese model; or something on the German model remains to be seen. As usual, supporters say that those camps will only be used to confine terrorists, while critics have another opinion. Starting with the rational question of "where would you find a half million or more terrorists to lock up in these camps?"
It all sounds very Francoish to me. But my Jewish friend still has has her prison camp number and she is convinced they will be Belsen all over again.
Stranger
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Feb 24, 2010 20:03:52 GMT
[quote author="@ nautonnier" timestamp="1266981380" source="/post/42445/thread"]Certainly Nautonnier, these are the ´mechanics´ lying behind and explaining what´s happening now -you were very nice, patient and didactic explaining that to me in a different post- but what´s happening now has happened before during our ´satellite era´and presumably it´s been so for ages... Please take a look at: www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao.timeseries.gifGraphs running from 1950 through 2010, this Historic NAO series are arbitrarily split fo a more convenient ´look´and presentation (four graphs covering 15 years each). One doesn´t need complex maths to see how last graph (1995-2010) looks more like first starting graph (1950-1964) than alike previous one (1980-1995). In short: negative NAO index (in blue) seems to prevail except for 1982-1995, so I can´t really see patterns have changed, as you say, and though our technology is far better now than in the 50´s I suppose it´s not that difficult to compare old weather data, reports and observations from the past toh what we´re observing now during this prevailing ´negative´ AO and NAO index cycle, and by ´now´ I mean not only this crazy winter, but many others in the last 15 years... What do you think about this? May I be missing something?
If you go to www.accuweather.com you can look at Joe Bastardi's European Blog www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp
Joe Bastardi is the son of a weather forecaster and lives eats and sleeps weather. He does look back into patterns of the 1930's and so on identifying similarities that allowed him to forecast the bad weather that Europe is having now. He forecast the drop in Atlantic hurricanes etc etc.
All of forecasting is based on pattern matching. As technology has improved instead of counting berries on trees and dates of animals hibernating, forecasters have moved to looking at patterns in satellite imagery, water vapor concentrations, complete gridded atmosphere analyses with points 40km apart with temperature, humidity, winds, etc etc. But its still patterns and the matching is done by software - but the software was designed by forecasters who effectively put the observed pattern rules into the software that if X and Y then A and B will occur. When you work with forecasters some will accept what 'the computer' has told them others will adjust the forecast in the light of their pattern experience. In forecasting this is seen as a 'confidence' level in the forecast - it is a Bayesian probability based on the forecaster's belief in the automated forecast. But as with all areas of modern life more and more forecasters trust the machine and its pattern matching as the easy way out.
The atmosphere is mathematically chaotic, this does not mean that there are not patterns its just that the viewpoint for identifying the patterns may need to be altered ( look at Poincaré sections ) So for a short period observed patterns may repeat then for no apparent reason alter. Some of these chaotic patterns are common others rarely occur, or do not often occur with others in certain states. So the Earth spends most of its time in a glacial ice age mode (in chaos theory a 'strong attractor') then some changes of state or small forces occur - and the Earth warms out of the ice age toward a weaker attractor set of states resulting in a brief inter-glacial period. Inside this current interglacial there are patterns and phases in the climate and weather - some very long scales others short - together they can appear to be chaotic noise. Eventually, the right trigger will occur - and the climate will move back to the strong attractor of the ice age state.
Humans spend all their time looking for patterns and cause and effect, but in chaotic systems these patterns may not be apparent and the cause for changes may be a very small unlikely change but at _just_ the _right_ time..... hence the debate over the so called 'butterfly effect'.
Science has recently gained the capability to collect almost all the data on what is happening from galactic level down to variations in atmosphere, soil and seawater and photons affects on molecules. But turning this data into information on what will happen next results into a return into pattern matching - more complex pattern matching. You can only match patterns if you have seen them before - and to see previous patterns that are more than two or three centuries old science is reduced to using 'proxies' for the values needed. Proxies need interpretation and some work others don't. So there is a temptation to choose the proxy that provides a recognizable pattern that fits with what the researcher 'expects'. The problem is that patterns can be misconstrued - e.g. the correlation not causation or common causation issues debated so hotly here.
So what we have now is 'science' largely limiting itself to 'the satellite era' as lots of high quality data is available. Almost certainly patterns will not be simple linear effects and the patterns in the chaos may not be apparent unless the date is considered over centuries. But the data from that far in the past is vague and misleading and requires climatologists to work with biologists, geologists, physicists and chemists trying to obtain information from proxy data that may really not be there. It was the discovery that the tree-ring proxies did not actually act as proxies for temperature that caused the 'hide the decline' panic in the University of East Anglia - all the patterns they had extrapolated from the past were now in question.
It can be difficult for some of these researchers to admit that they / we just don't know what happened in the past and why it happened in sufficient detail to forecast what is likely in the future. Some of the climate models being run now are extremely complex, but they just extrapolate the pattern assumptions of the researchers forward and the chaotic climate system so far has refused to follow expectations. Keep observing what actually happens as we are watching new patterns in much more detail than in the past. Will we get sufficient understanding to forecast the next decades? Some people are convinced this is possible - I am not so sure.
I hope that was not too rambling a response |
[/quote] Precise, wise and very didactic, Nautonnier, that´s like your response looks to me (though I´ve had to check ´rambling´ and a few more words in my dictionary, thanks as well for ´my´new English words learned today) Overall, the most outstanding part of your argumentation is that -to me- it somehow relects what ´I feel´, I mean that far from beeing any expert on anything -just a curious guy- you´ve put black on white some ideas -or perhaps I should call them ´feelings´- that I bear regarding how this entire ´world´functions... Getting acquaintanced now with Bastardi´s blog, very interesting indeed. Could you please recommend me some reading -rather level 1 for ´beginners´ - on Chaotic Systems or Chaos theory and/or butterfly effect? I love whenever Maths, Science and Philosophy converge,, just different sides of same unique reality...As it used to be in Ancient Greece... that´s what Chaos, Chaotic and butterfly effect´ sounds to me... (and this ´philosophy´would apply to social, political and economic enviroments as well, in my opinion) Could a single ´formula´be ever able to explain this Universe? Sorry if this was too rambling a question now...
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Feb 24, 2010 20:40:08 GMT
Hola, Carlos. Most Americans who use the term "European socialism" have no clue about what they are talking about. Most of the "socialist governments" are not socialist by definition. They only tax like socialist governments, and their police and other people control mechanisms are modeled on various fascist regimes of the pre-1945 era. Your comment about Guantanamo is interesting. Many of my European amigos have expressed concern about it. But the number of prisoners at Guantanamo are necessarily limited. Americans are afraid of Obama's friend Alcee Hastings plan to turn many of our closed military bases into concentration camps with the capability to hold hundreds of thousands if not millions. Whether those will actually be gigantic Gitmos; "reeducation camps" on the Chinese model; or something on the German model remains to be seen. As usual, supporters say that those camps will only be used to confine terrorists, while critics have another opinion. Starting with the rational question of "where would you find a half million or more terrorists to lock up in these camps?" It all sounds very Francoish to me. But my Jewish friend still has has her prison camp number and she is convinced they will be Belsen all over again. Stranger Hi Stranger, saddly enough it´s not only Guantanamo... just go again through my ironic description of what we´ve had here in Spain til we -peacefully- regained our right to be free... both as individuals and as citizens. Guantanamo, nowadays, is the peak of the Iceberg (said it right?). Terrorist or non-so-terrorist people (collateral damages, they call it) have been kidnapped, trapped, moved from US bases to secret prisons of third countries and tortured all ´round´our free world, with the necessary aid of our friendly ´democratic´ governments -like Saudi Arabia, just as an example, and -to my shame- the cooperation of many European countries, including mine. Really, if you want them (the prisoners) you should take them, feed them, judge them (judge them? oh! what a great idea, no one thought about it!) so -perhaps- you may put them under your judiciary power?... or just explain to me what Democracy means to you. But the big problem, I guess, is taxes up or taxes down... that means socialism up or down, isn´t it? And now let´s go for Iran, just in case we run out of wars (Iraq, Afganistan...) but the cost of USA ´warfaring´ round the world must have nothing to do with taxes... No? Otherwise I would have read something about it in this forum, some concern... something... Nope, just CO2 is to be blamed for that (possible tax raises)
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Feb 24, 2010 21:29:33 GMT
PS: Hey! I´ve just mentioned CO2... after all this a Global Warming and Weather discussion, so please, don´t ban me! (besides I am perhaps ´warming´this discussion as well, so I think I qualify for the thread or, finallly I might be part of some Conspiracy, which also qualifies here)
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Feb 24, 2010 21:51:06 GMT
Stranger: "It all sounds very Francoish to me. But my Jewish friend still has has her prison camp number and she is convinced they will be Belsen all over again" My father´s plane was shot down by German´s antiaircraft artillery within Spanish Territory turing Spanish Civil War... prior to WWII. He was put before a Martial Court and was redeemed from death penalty last minute (that´s mainly the reason why you all have to withstand me here, otherwise I wouldn´t be) So tell your jewish friend to come here to Spain and stay living here with us, she is more than welcome.... no concentration camps here... ( ay ay ay... this Obama... he´s probably not even an American native, right? Not an indian indeed!). Just in case it helps your government: we simply try to capture terrorists (we also had our own S-11 here in Madrid, you know) judge them and put them into prison if found guilty... and, by the way, we do not longer stand with CIA´s flights carrying the ´unknown´ nameless prisoners to an ´unknown´destiny and overflying my homeland and other ´friendly´countries.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Feb 25, 2010 0:24:04 GMT
karlox: another country, same political views, I've expressed mine here too. I also live in an "extremely socialist" country , so I must feel heavily controlled and oppressed by the government . Also, according to the -all knowing- Republicans (I've had quite a few discussions with them when I lived in Florida (Panama City) and Oklahoma (University of Oklahoma, Norman).) my country (and yours, and especially Sweden and Norway) must be very poor... Actually, when we moved to the US, we were warned (by US officials) that you can not say everything you want. Also, you can not have a beer if you are below 21, you can never smoke weed even if you are not bothering anyone. Oh, yeah, I've talked to a few gay people in Oklahoma, they were also having a pretty hard time getting accepted (well, although government rules here are really pro gay people, some minority groups (e.g. some muslims) seem to have trouble with them). There are a lot of laws in the US which mingle with your personal freedom, at least from a European perspective. BTW the Netherlands have both higher (or at least equal) living standards and have higher net income than people in the US. Same is true for Norway and Sweden. So the argument that European "socialist" countries are poor does not hold. This does not mean that our system is better than the system in the US of course. What works in the US might not work in Europe and the other way around. For us it is hard to imagine or accept, but for some (usually third world) countries, a democratic system might not work. The US seem to do pretty well, and most of the European countries too, so maybe we should stop criticizing each other's politics... However we are free to discuss them ;D.
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Feb 25, 2010 0:42:29 GMT
Karloc, don't mean to butt in, but maybe I can offer some reading on so called "Chaos" theory. Really called "Non-linear Dynamics". Relative to systems - natural or otherwise - it would be "non-linear dynamical systems" . One of the first popular books on the subject was by James Gleick; "Chaos, Making a new science". It's ok, but not in depth mathematically. Another is "Newton's Clock, Chaos in the Solar System"; by Ivars Peterson. On-line, there are a great many universities that offer studies in the field, often as part of the Math dept. UMD www-chaos.umd.edu/ is one such. There is also quite a lot of software available to help visualize such systems via fractal generation. One that I like is Fractint. It's been around for many years and allows you to write your own formulas, and experiment. www.nahee.com/spanky/www/fractint/fractint.html . There are others of course, some better, some worse. If you are a programmer, you could write your own in C++, VB, etc. It's a fascinating subject, with a great many real world applications from finance to aerospace. You may also be interested to know that the subject is addressed by DARPA in both theoretical and practical applications in complex systems such as communications. www.darpa.mil .
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Feb 25, 2010 1:02:31 GMT
There are a lot of laws in the US which mingle with your personal freedom, at least from a European perspective. Yes there are and I am against them. I am no longer Republican and I no longer call myself conservative. I am a classic liberal. I believe in limited government and greater personal freedom coupled with personal responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Feb 25, 2010 8:30:40 GMT
There are a lot of laws in the US which mingle with your personal freedom, at least from a European perspective. Yes there are and I am against them. I am no longer Republican and I no longer call myself conservative. I am a classic liberal. I believe in limited government and greater personal freedom coupled with personal responsibility. Personal responsibility ... that's a laugh! Anything that happens nowdays is always someone else's fault.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Feb 25, 2010 13:45:56 GMT
True, we are seeing a strong trend here towards blaming someone else for your own responsibilities. A very bad one. We are on the verge of being forced to introduce more strict regulations, because somehow people have lost their common sense in handling their freedom .
|
|