Re: Brazil's Twin Town
Jim Sharkey wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/brazil/4307262/Nazi- angel-of-death-Josef-Mengele-created-twin-town-in-Brazil.html Joseph Mengele apparently found a way to increase the birthrate of the master race, at least in this small Brazilian enclave. Pretty wacky stuff, though it's unfortunate they get into any of the science of how he did it. Sure, there's some fertility treatments involved I'm sure, but the article seems to suggest the multiple births have continued long since his death. I would laugh, if this was not sad. All this assumes that Mengele had _any_ competence either as a physician or as a scientist. What's next? That Mengele cloned his own bones, found the longetivity drug, and is planning to take the world? Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Portal Gun
Dave Land wrote: On Jan 22, 2009, at 2:40 PM, Rceeberger wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/30109...@n03/sets/72157612758626401/ I'm making a note here: huge success. I HAVE to show that to my son, who is a huge Portal fan. Your son has excellent taste in games. Portal was the best game of 2007 in my opinion. Interesting puzzles and a loopy, dark sense of humor. Jim The cake is a Maru Used Car Click here and choose from thousands of high quality used cars. http://tagline.excite.com/fc/BK72PcZbm4A1mVKkpT3pZh642sV1RmuhCyWaZNKCzqZn0R7qEFfjpK/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.orgwrote: It's interesting, but I'm really sick of the evolution can't explain this schtick. Evolution explains how diversity occurs. Extinction events are known, some are understood. That we don't know the specific causes of certain extinction events says nothing at all about evolutionary theory. I didn't read that as a criticism of evolution. It sounded to me akin to a statement like monetary policy falls short of explaining inflationary cycles. In other words, related, but not particularly germane... which seems to me to be your point. Or are you suggesting that mentioning evolution in the context of extinction events is as germane as bringing up fluoridation of water when analyzing football strategies? Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, xponentrob wrote: - Original Message - From: Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 6:53 PM Subject: Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks Hey Rob - if you're going to post links to articles, can you at least include a paragraph or so of each linked article to show what's interesting about it and maybe explain why I'd bother clicking it. I'm sure I'm not alone in being very reluctant to click naked links. Likewise, it's normally not necessary to post an entire article from elsewhere here... A little nudity never hurt anybody. Well, if you're not an albino and out during daylight hours, maybe (I've never been hurt by nudity as long as there have been appropriate amounts of sunscreen involved. The last thing I want to do is burn my nipples.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks
On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, xponentrob wrote: - Original Message - From: Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 6:53 PM Subject: Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks Hey Rob - if you're going to post links to articles, can you at least include a paragraph or so of each linked article to show what's interesting about it and maybe explain why I'd bother clicking it. I'm sure I'm not alone in being very reluctant to click naked links. Likewise, it's normally not necessary to post an entire article from elsewhere here... A little nudity never hurt anybody. Well, if you're not an albino and out during daylight hours, maybe (I've never been hurt by nudity as long as there have been appropriate amounts of sunscreen involved. The last thing I want to do is burn my nipples.) Julia I have it on reliable authority that that is a *bad* place for a sunburn, for a number of reasons. :S ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Bruce Bostwick wrote: On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, xponentrob wrote: - Original Message - From: Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 6:53 PM Subject: Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks Hey Rob - if you're going to post links to articles, can you at least include a paragraph or so of each linked article to show what's interesting about it and maybe explain why I'd bother clicking it. I'm sure I'm not alone in being very reluctant to click naked links. Likewise, it's normally not necessary to post an entire article from elsewhere here... A little nudity never hurt anybody. Well, if you're not an albino and out during daylight hours, maybe (I've never been hurt by nudity as long as there have been appropriate amounts of sunscreen involved. The last thing I want to do is burn my nipples.) Julia I have it on reliable authority that that is a *bad* place for a sunburn, for a number of reasons. :S I'm just glad not to be in the position of reliable authority for that. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks
On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Bruce Bostwick wrote: On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, xponentrob wrote: - Original Message - From: Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 6:53 PM Subject: Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks Hey Rob - if you're going to post links to articles, can you at least include a paragraph or so of each linked article to show what's interesting about it and maybe explain why I'd bother clicking it. I'm sure I'm not alone in being very reluctant to click naked links. Likewise, it's normally not necessary to post an entire article from elsewhere here... A little nudity never hurt anybody. Well, if you're not an albino and out during daylight hours, maybe (I've never been hurt by nudity as long as there have been appropriate amounts of sunscreen involved. The last thing I want to do is burn my nipples.) Julia I have it on reliable authority that that is a *bad* place for a sunburn, for a number of reasons. :S I'm just glad not to be in the position of reliable authority for that. Julia Based on the account of the reliable authority in question, yeah, be very glad. I think she said something along the lines of I don't ever, ever, EVER want to have to go through that again.. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
Doug wrote: Furthermore, because of concerns about climate change and unrest in the middle east, a prediction that batteries and cheap electric cars are going to be in great demand over the next several decades is a good bet. I have no arguement against the concept that cheap batteries and cheap electric cars would be in great demand. That has beent true since 1973, when the oil boycott woke us up to the dependance of the world on Mid-East oil. Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. So, we've made real progress since '73. In another 35 years, we may very well have competative battery powered cars that are flexible enough to be competative in the US and European markets. We also may have biofuels that are sensible because bioengineering has progressed to the point where we have 20%+ efficiency in converting sunlight to complex, burnable, hydrocarbons. But, until that happens, China will pick the cheapest option. Even when oil recovers to reasonable, sustainable prices (say $60-$80/barrel), hybrids will not make sense until the premium is, roughly, cut in half. Compact electric cars are roughly 40k, compared to about 13k for compact gas cars, and have a range 100 miles/charge. So, these cars are only for the richand the well off Chinese who can afford to move up from a bike to a car are not rich by US standards. Further, oil usage in a country that is just starting to introduce automobiles their oil usage is not for private So a move to all electric strengthens government control by alleviating dependence on foreign oil and automobiles and expands the economy not only internally but globally. But, the Chinese do make autos, 7 million in 2006. They import oil, but they are also a producer, about 60% of their oil is internally produced. Coal is their favorite and cheapest option, so that is a plus for electricity (although a minus for the environment). So, while they would have an even better foreign trade balance than they do without importing oil, they are in a far different position than the US. For some reason, I keep on getting the feel that those who think that we can decrease worldwide CO2 output in the next 10 years feel that if nations only had the will, then they could quickly produce cheap alternative energy. It's not like the moon race, where price was no object, its more like space factories, where price is a critical factor. And so far, prices for alternative energy are not falling rapidly. That's why I think we need a disruptive innovation for things to change. For example, several years ago, there were pollution regulations passed. They have all been ignored, with no real consequences. The only exception to this was during the Olympics, when some industries had to shut down and most people had to stop driving so Beijing looked as good as possible. Well, you can only crap upstream for so long before you figure out that it's a pretty stupid habit. IIRC, we know that's been going on in India for 3000 years. :-) Perhaps the Olympics has been a wake up call for the Chinese. I haven't seen any data that indicates that the Chinese will be willing to sacrifice ecconomic growth for pollution control. That is a tradeoff that the West agreed to because we were rich enough to have that on the agenda. But, it wasn't until the '60s that we did. If history is a guide, China is a good ways away from having the per capita GDP at which countries start spending it on pollution control. Perhaps they will do it faster than average, but since they are a factor of ~9 less than the US in 2007(5.4k vs 45k on Wikipedia), it would be unrealistic to expect them to accept lower incomes to attack pollution for at least a decade. I would guess that global warming would be an issue for them later than that. I think the only possible way to change this pattern is to change the relative expense of batteries, biofuels, large capacity energy storage, etc. Without that, China will keep on adding 1% to its CO2 output for 1% growth in income (it's been faster than that lateley, but I think it will fall to that over the next 10 years or so) for at least a decade. At that point, it should have twice the CO2 output of the US and EU combined. We can wish this won't happen, but history indicates it will. Dan M. mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:00 PM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote: Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. And that, in turn, is a symptom of how susceptible the mainstream is to short-term thinking and its application to decisions with long-term effects. People buying cars really seem to think that fuel prices will always be what they are right now, and we won't have another $4+/gal peak or even higher soon. They also really seem to think there won't be an overall upward trend on top of seasonal and market-driven fluctuations. No other interpretation makes sense to me, when people turn around and buy 10-15 mpg SUV's and pickups the moment fuel goes down below $2/gal. (The only exception would be if they plan to trade the thing in next summer when the fuel prices go back up, which is a different kind of insanity.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Cattalica
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/6798/af20907621cbf76cee7547eco9.jpg Heavy Metal Cats xponent Built By Anons Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
- Original Message - From: dsummersmi...@comcast.net To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 12:00 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. Aren't overall vehicle sales been falling like a rock? SUV/Truck sales have been getting a larger share of the pie of late, but as I understand it all sales are down and this is why *all* automakers are having troubles. xponent Question Of The Day Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
Original Message: - From: xponentrob xponent...@comcast.net Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:56:08 -0600 To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? - Original Message - From: dsummersmi...@comcast.net To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 12:00 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. Aren't overall vehicle sales been falling like a rock? SUV/Truck sales have been getting a larger share of the pie of late, but as I understand it all sales are down and this is why *all* automakers are having troubles. But, hybrid sales are falling much faster. The latest comparison I got was through November, and (according to the eia), gas prices fell 20% from November to December. From http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/r-l-polk-co-ana.html quote Sales of the market-leading Prius were down 48.3% to 8,660its lowest sales month since January 2007. Camry Hybrid sales were off 57.5%, down to 2,174 units. That accounted for 8.6% of all Camry sales. Total Camry sales for the month were down 28.8%. Sales of the Highlander Hybrid were down 64.8% to 907 units, representing 11.5% of all Highlander models sold. Total Highlander sales were down 35.9% in the month. end quote So, as of November, they are dropping by about a factor of 2 more than the same gas powered models. Car sales are dropping, hybrid sales are dropping much faster. And, while I don't have the details available, indications are that the relative slide continues. In a couple of months, we'll see if there's a bottom. If not, hybrid sales will drop to the point where the sales become insignificant. Dan M. mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
- Original Message - From: dsummersmi...@comcast.net To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:39 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? Original Message: - From: xponentrob xponent...@comcast.net Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:56:08 -0600 To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? - Original Message - From: dsummersmi...@comcast.net To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 12:00 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. Aren't overall vehicle sales been falling like a rock? SUV/Truck sales have been getting a larger share of the pie of late, but as I understand it all sales are down and this is why *all* automakers are having troubles. But, hybrid sales are falling much faster. The latest comparison I got was through November, and (according to the eia), gas prices fell 20% from November to December. From http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/r-l-polk-co-ana.html quote Sales of the market-leading Prius were down 48.3% to 8,660-its lowest sales month since January 2007. Camry Hybrid sales were off 57.5%, down to 2,174 units. That accounted for 8.6% of all Camry sales. Total Camry sales for the month were down 28.8%. Sales of the Highlander Hybrid were down 64.8% to 907 units, representing 11.5% of all Highlander models sold. Total Highlander sales were down 35.9% in the month. end quote So, as of November, they are dropping by about a factor of 2 more than the same gas powered models. Car sales are dropping, hybrid sales are dropping much faster. And, while I don't have the details available, indications are that the relative slide continues. In a couple of months, we'll see if there's a bottom. If not, hybrid sales will drop to the point where the sales become insignificant. *** So I'm wondering if the more expensive luxury versions of the comparable models are seeing similar falls in sales. Are people forgoing the bells and whistles also? xponent Further Investigations Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
-Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Bostwick Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 12:20 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:00 PM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote: Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at leastbut when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. And that, in turn, is a symptom of how susceptible the mainstream is to short-term thinking and its application to decisions with long-term effects. People buying cars really seem to think that fuel prices will always be what they are right now, and we won't have another $4+/gal peak or even higher soon. They also really seem to think there won't be an overall upward trend on top of seasonal and market-driven fluctuations. Discounting 2008's ups and downs (which were spectacular), we saw a steady price trend in most commodities (e.g. iron ore, tin, gold, aluminum) from the mid 70s to 2007: downward. Last year was a roller coaster, but few of the folks who are responsible for making long term decisions that are highly dependant on prices assumed that 4+ dollar gas would last long. The bet in the oil patch was that oil prices would settle back under 80. If you really believe that oil will go back north of 100 within the next 5 years, you should sell oil short on the futures market. The long term trend is off this bottom, but you could still sell for 62 dollars in 2 years and 70 dollars in 5. That's consistent with the general range that long term projects were assuming last summer, when prices spiked near $150. So, on average, $2.50-$3.00 (inflation adjusted) gas is a good bet for the lifetime of a car. No other interpretation makes sense to me, when people turn around and buy 10-15 mpg SUV's and pickups the moment fuel goes down below $2/gal. (The only exception would be if they plan to trade the thing in next summer when the fuel prices go back up, which is a different kind of insanity.) But, they were buying them in decent numbers when gas was $2.50-$3.00/gallon. There is nothing that indicates that the long term average price of oil (say over a 5 year period) will go above $80.00/barrel within the next decade. The oil patch would love steady oil in the 60-80 dollar range, and steady natural gas at about $6.00/thousand cubic feet. Remember, peak oil was first predicted to be within 5 years in 1920. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
- Original Message - From: xponentrob xponent...@comcast.net To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:49 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? *** So I'm wondering if the more expensive luxury versions of the comparable models are seeing similar falls in sales. Are people forgoing the bells and whistles also? To Answer my own question: http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-06-voa59.cfm Industry analyst Jesse Toprak says that while the slumping global economy has hurt all vehicle sales, trucks and sport utility vehicles outsold cars because of deep dealer discounts, lower gas prices and the fact that hybrids cost $3,000 to $5,000 more than conventional cars. It is a known that dealers have had a lot of overstock in trucks and SUVs from last summer. I would think that if the same discounts were available for the hybrids, sales would not have dropped off so steeply. xponent Da Moneez Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
On Jan 23, 2009, at 5:07 PM, xponentrob wrote: From: xponentrob xponent...@comcast.net To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:49 PM Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? *** So I'm wondering if the more expensive luxury versions of the comparable models are seeing similar falls in sales. Are people forgoing the bells and whistles also? To Answer my own question: http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-06-voa59.cfm Industry analyst Jesse Toprak says that while the slumping global economy has hurt all vehicle sales, trucks and sport utility vehicles outsold cars because of deep dealer discounts, lower gas prices and the fact that hybrids cost $3,000 to $5,000 more than conventional cars. It is a known that dealers have had a lot of overstock in trucks and SUVs from last summer. I would think that if the same discounts were available for the hybrids, sales would not have dropped off so steeply. xponent Da Moneez Maru rob A bit of anecdotal data that might be informative: According to more than one local Toyota dealer, the Prius holds its resale value well enough that there is surprisingly little price difference between a new Prius and a used but new condition Prius, even from a previous model year. The standard ICE-only cars' resale values tend to drop like rocks once they get into the hands of their first owners. (This may no longer be true, as my last info on it comes from near the $4/gal peak and depreciation may now be a bigger factor, but it's something to think about. As far as I know, ICE's still depreciate considerably faster than hybrids.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
On 24/01/2009, at 2:58 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.orgwrote: It's interesting, but I'm really sick of the evolution can't explain this schtick. Evolution explains how diversity occurs. Extinction events are known, some are understood. That we don't know the specific causes of certain extinction events says nothing at all about evolutionary theory. I didn't read that as a criticism of evolution. It sounded to me akin to a statement like monetary policy falls short of explaining inflationary cycles. In other words, related, but not particularly germane... which seems to me to be your point. Or are you suggesting that mentioning evolution in the context of extinction events is as germane as bringing up fluoridation of water when analyzing football strategies? It's closer to the first example you suggest than the second, but it's part of a general trope of less-good science writing that pitches every new minor spin on science as rewriting the whole body of theory that is really starting to wind me up. We need more better science writers - there aren't enough Ben Goldacres and Carl Zimmers out there... Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.orgwrote: It's closer to the first example you suggest than the second, but it's part of a general trope of less-good science writing that pitches every new minor spin on science as rewriting the whole body of theory that is really starting to wind me up. I'll bet you were happy, as I was, to hear applause when Obama said We will restore *science* to its rightful place... Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
The Mac is 25
Apple officially launched the Macintosh 25 years ago, Jan. 24, 1984. History Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : w...@wtgab.demon.co.uk Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ “Babies are born every day without an iPod. We will get there.” - Adam Sohn, the head of public relations for Microsoft’s Zune division. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mac is 25
On Jan 23, 2009, at 7:18 PM, William T Goodall wrote: Apple officially launched the Macintosh 25 years ago, Jan. 24, 1984. History Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : w...@wtgab.demon.co.uk Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ “Babies are born every day without an iPod. We will get there.” - Adam Sohn, the head of public relations for Microsoft’s Zune division. So the first generation 128K Macs are now officially antique computers? This is an amazing honor. I want you to know that I spend so much time in the world that is spinning all the time, that to be in the no- spin zone actually gives me vertigo. -- Stephen Colbert during an interview on FOX News, The O'Reilly Factor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Which oil patch?
Which oil patch are you talking about? Offshore drilling is not feasible at the 60-80 dollar range as was proven by the fact that over 66 million acres under lease have not been drilled. I believe the last dry hole offshore in Alaska cost $150 million. My wife's small share of oil rights in west Texas were not opened up until we hit the 80+ range and at least one of those wells was depleted in six months. Can we agree that the price of oil is being manipulated? The question is why and by who. Perhaps if we look at the results of the price changes it will give us a clue. With the old administration the price of oil could go up significantly and nothing was really done. What would have been the reaction of the new administration in the face of such price increases? We know because Obama and his team has been very clear, a national program to get this country off of oil. Now if you did not want this to happen what would be the quickest thing you could do to kill such a program? Drive the price of oil down? and what do we see? It is almost too obvious to believe, isn't it? But this discussion is an example of how effective it has been. Automobile sales figures have to take into account more than just falling oil prices. Add in the lending difficulties that financial institutions are having with the expiration of tax incentives on some hybrids(Prius) makes any such analysis suspect. I also believe that tremendous incentives that dealers are offering to clear inventory has had the biggest effect. No such incentives are being offered on hybrids to the best of my knowledge. Our culture from the sales people to we, the consumers, in general think in terms of 3 to 5 year vehicle life. Why not take a good deal now on a gas guzzler, knowing that in 3 to 5 years we will get a new vehicle which will be more efficient than today's hybrids? The assumption of course is that things will be better in the near term, gas prices will stay low and that we will be able to afford a new vehicle in 3 to 5 years. Advertising supports this message and companies spend money on advertising because it works especially if you are trying to create short term results. If they ever needed short term results GM, Ford and Chrysler need them now. The sales numbers you are seeing are being driven by those advertising dollars and dealer discounts. Once again we shoot ourselves in the foot over short term results. I bought a Prius and a Ford Hybrid early last year and I am not apologetic nor do I regret it. I think that the next few years will prove the decision to be both financially prudent and environmentally sound. I suspect that you will see the sales numbers for gas guzzlers go down quickly once inventories are drawn down and new incentives are not forthcoming. In addition the car companies know this. The lines for big vehicles are being closed or severely cut back. New more efficient vehicles are being pushed through RD. Obama's team will not forget their plans nor should they. Our national financial security should not be held hostage to the whim of some hazy entity that can manipulate oil prices. I know I am jumping in here late. I hope that my thoughts add to the discussion. Chris Frandsen On Jan 23, 2009, at 5:04 PM, Dan M wrote: But, they were buying them in decent numbers when gas was $2.50-$3.00/gallon. There is nothing that indicates that the long term average price of oil (say over a 5 year period) will go above $80.00/ barrel within the next decade. The oil patch would love steady oil in the 60-80 dollar range, and steady natural gas at about $6.00/thousand cubic feet. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Which oil patch?
-Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Chris Frandsen Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:56 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Which oil patch? Which oil patch are you talking about? You know, the one that Schlumberger, Baker Hughes, Halliburton, Weatherford, Pathfinder, Phoenix, Ryan, Tucker, Great Guns Logging, and a number of other smaller wireline and MWD companies log in. Offshore drilling is not feasible at the 60-80 dollar range as was proven by the fact that over 66 million acres under lease have not been drilled. When oil was $9.80/barrel back in '98, I developed tools that were running offshore on oil rigs. I know folks who had to bid projects, and who were told what range the field had to make money at. For example, back in '00, when prices went back over $20 barrel, any new field had to be justified at $15/barrel. And, a number of them were offshore. I believe the last dry hole offshore in Alaska cost $150 million. If it was a rank wildcat, that's possible. But, the US has been developing offshore fields for longer than I've been in the business (25+ years). My wife's small share of oil rights in west Texas were not opened up until we hit the 80+ range and at least one of those wells was depleted in six months. That's a real old field. In traditional Texas fields, yields are low. Reopening old wells is a iffy business. Once a well is shut in, it tends to restart at a much lower production rate and be much easier to go dry quickly. Can we agree that the price of oil is being manipulated? There is no data that suggest that. The biggest player in the marker (OPEC at 40% market share) has watched helplessly as oil prices hit the floor several times during supply gluts. The oil field has had downturns that no other industry I'm familiar with has. I've been through 50%, 80% and 50% layoffs during three downturns. It's true that there are fields that are profitable at $150/barrel that are not profitable at $80/barrel. But, anyone who has lived through the ups and downs of oil prices over the last 25 years knows that spikes are followed by troughs. Remember, it takes a long time to develop a field. From seismic to a developed field can take 10 years. No one in their right mind would authorize a field that is only profitable if the latest spike holds. That's stupid beyond belief. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brazil's Twin Town
Alberto wrote: I would laugh, if this was not sad. All this assumes that Mengele had _any_ competence either as a physician or as a scientist. What's next? That Mengele cloned his own bones, found the longetivity drug, and is planning to take the world? I think I've seen that movie! Doug Could be mistaken maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Hunt For Goldilocks
Bruce wrote: Based on the account of the reliable authority in question, yeah, be very glad. I think she said something along the lines of I don't ever, ever, EVER want to have to go through that again.. I can tell you a few places I'd rather not get poison ivy on again... Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Tweetsnet beta
The social network analysis I've been doing on Twitter turned into a new site called Tweetsnet (http://tweetsnet.com) that shows web pages that are hot topics on Twitter. It's a blog, with a feed. It updates every 10 minutes or so with the five highest scoring, previously unpublished, web pages being talked about. Each post shows the page title, summary and keywords (as tags) if available, and frequent two-word phrases that appear in conjunction with the page citations. It's still beta and I'm still deciding where to go with it. Your thoughts, etc., are more than welcome. I'm considering similar feeds with a vertical focus. I'm also thinking of splitting out the pages that are cited by the big, popular aggregators, since they're already well-known. A lot of what is showing up now is news, so I'm also wondering if I can automate a comparison to something like Google News to see what the differences are. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
-Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Charlie Bell Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 5:16 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity It's closer to the first example you suggest than the second, but it's part of a general trope of less-good science writing that pitches every new minor spin on science as rewriting the whole body of theory that is really starting to wind me up. We need more better science writers - there aren't enough Ben Goldacres and Carl Zimmers out there... I think the problem is that an honest report of scientists are excited that, after five years of hard work by an very talented team of 300 Phd physicists, another small incremental improvement in our understanding has been achieved would sound too dull to read. I emphasize with you on this. I've been through the idea that everything we know about physics is now challenged by X, where X is a fairly minor tweak to a well established theory. Personally, the tying together of astrophysics and evolutionary biology, if it holds up, seems like a neat thing to me. But, it involves neither the rewriting of astrophysics or evolutionary biology. Even really revolutionary data, like the data that suggests dark energy, are written up in such a way that it implies that the big bang is now in question. That drives me crazy in the same way. But, at least that may lead to something truly new. This is just a minor neat thing. I think people will read/watch about science if and only if there is a good story told. Telling a good story without resorting to overstating your case is very hard. I can state things clearly and precisely, but, alas, I usually make folks eyes glaze over. Even good shows like Nova have had to dramatize what actually happens to make a story. The best do it without subtracting too much from an accurate description. Unfortunately, I fear the best are becoming less popular as drama becomes the driving force. Anyways, I honestly think I can empathize, not just sympathize with you here. :-) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
Dan wrote: Even really revolutionary data, like the data that suggests dark energy, are written up in such a way that it implies that the big bang is now in question. That drives me crazy in the same way. Yea, god forbid scientists that are skeptical about the bing bang! Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity
-Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Doug Pensinger Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 10:36 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Galactic Effect On Biodiversity Dan wrote: Even really revolutionary data, like the data that suggests dark energy, are written up in such a way that it implies that the big bang is now in question. That drives me crazy in the same way. Yea, god forbid scientists that are skeptical about the bing bang! Which scientists? Are they the same ones who are skeptical about evolution? :-) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
