Thanks, Greg, the graph in that 2nd reference is particularly interesting.  Bottom line?  Only God knows.
[]  

Kirby also ignored my snide comments about our Green Governor and Al Gore about whom I forgot to mention the fact that he sold his bankrupt cable channel for lots of oil money or, if you prefer, filthy lucre.  As luck would have it, Arnold answered my comment:
I am reminded of our former Green Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. While spouting all the "right" words, he never lived in Sacramento but commuted from his Brentwood home (better access to his cleaning lady?) here in the LA area using his private jet. One day's carbon footprint comparable to that of a normal LA commuter in a month if not a year.
with an op-ed on the issue in today's LA Times.  Fawning LA Times would be more appropriate...  They tried to undermine his first election by publishing a last- weekend article about suspect improper butt-pats, or some such (missing the huge story, of course) but - huge story or no - he's now a good-guy because of his do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do "greenness" (and other favorite issues):
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-0408-schwarzenegger-climate-report-20130408,0,6026654.story

W Bishop

At 02:01 PM 4/8/2013, Greg Goodknight wrote:
On 04/08/2013 08:57 AM, kirby urner wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Wayne Bishop <wbishop@calstatela.edu > wrote:
Not that this post has anything to do with mathematics education, of course, but I am amazed at how fuzzy thinking in one area implies fuzzy thinking in most if not all others.  My guess is that you follow the head-in-the-sand approach to federal and state "entitlements"?  That is, just tax the rich and ignore the far more imminent catastrophe of federal and state finances if adjustments to "entitlements" are not made?  Abortions, too, right up to natural birth is just between a woman and her doctor?


I am aware of ethnic subcultures within the North American vista who have but a fuzzy understanding of one another.  I am not the "you" referred to in the above paragraph, I'm just sampling it for a set of projections that help paint a position.

What "between a woman and her doctor?" -- it's between herself and her conscience, the Goddess or whomever.  Or she can discuss it mentally with her projection of the baby.  She need not take orders from the men around her, though sure, she's free to seek their advice, including that of the XY father, presuming he's known. These would be recognizable norms for me.  In other cultures, it's all about what the patriarchs decide.  Fine, I'll read about it in National Geographic.
 
Regarding this pipeline, the oil is going to be used either to US's benefit or China's.  Your preference would be...?


To me, this sounds fuzzy, a false dichotomy

How about this dichotomy, Kirby... it'll either be transported by pipeline to refineries in the south of the USA, or by tanker across the Pacific from the west coast of Canada. As an Oregonian, which do you prefer?

Math and science reporting is catching up with dioxycarbophobia, with fresh articles in The Telegraphj and The Economist dialing back the scare.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/9974397/Global-warming-time-to-rein-back-on-doom-and-gloom.html#disqus_thread
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21574461-climate-may-be-heating-up-less-response-greenhouse-gas-emissions

-Greg







, as if my manufacturing plant of say widgets (flextegrity components) is not as valuable as some socialist BP-powered jalopy called "The Pentagon" that squanders fuel on meaningless "make work" wars.  I'd prefer Chinese peasants were benefiting from the fact that fuel was available to them at my plants, over letting gas hog SUV fleets plow the freeways to and fro merely to make others miserable, as a profession.  Not that all so-called DCers are that unappealing, just don't mix up the issues and make it "US against Chinese".  That's low-on-the-totem-pole analysis, where most people are content to remain simpletons.

Kirby