NYC cracks down on bottomless bars. Topless bars still survive, for now.
Daily Archives: February 25, 2014
Since Warm Fraud was always about centralized control and taxation, they’ll just move on to something else
If you look at the record of global temperature data, you will find that the late 20th Century period of global warming actually lasted about 20 years, from the late 1970s to the late 1990s. Before that, the globe was dominated by about 30 years of global cooling, giving rise in the 1970s to media discussions of the return of the Little Ice Age (circa 1450 to 1850), or worse.
But the record of satellite measurements of global atmospheric temperatures now shows no warming for at least 17 years and 5 months, from September, 1996 to January, 2014, as shown on the accompanying graphic. That is surely 17 years and 6 months now, accounting for February.
When the period of no global warming began, the alarmist global warming establishment responded that even several years of temperature data does not establish a climate trend. That takes much longer. But when the period of no global warming gets longer than the period of actual global warming, what is the climate trend then?
“OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750.”
That one quarter is actually now one third since the industrial revolution, which is now increasingly at stake in this debate. We are not going to be able to power anything remotely like the modern industrial revolution, which is actually straining even now to burst out of the “Progressive” bonds holding it back (at least in America), using the wind sources that powered the Roman economy, plus dancing on sunbeams.
Moreover, the now extended trend of no global warming is not turning around any time soon. That increasingly established trend is being produced by long term natural causes. Even rank amateurs among the general public can see that the sun is the dominant influence on the Earth’s temperatures. Even the most politicized scientists know that they cannot deny that solar activity such as sun spot cycles, and variations in solar magnetic fields or in the flux of cosmic rays, have contributed to major climate changes of the past, such as the Little Ice Age, particularly pronounced from roughly 1650 AD to 1850 AD, the Medieval Warm period from about 950 AD to 1250 AD, during which global temperatures were higher than today, and the early 20th century Warming Period from 1910 to 1940 AD.
That solar activity, particularly sunspot cycles, is starting to mimic the same patterns that were seen during the Little Ice Age, as I discussed in a previous column. As a result, outside politically correct Western circles, where science today has been Lysenkoized on this issue, there is a burgeoning debate about how long of a cooling trend will result.
Consumer Reports has named the Tesla Model S electric car the best money can buy and I’m sure it’s very nice, but what sort of value is a $90,000 car that can drive just 225 miles before stopping for a five-hour recharge? That range won’t permit a drive from NYC to Washington (226 miles – feeling lucky, kid?), or to a gay weekend in Provincetown (298). It will, I suppose, carry you and your secretary to Woodstock, NY (110), but not Woodstock Vermont (264), and forget a trip for lobster rolls in Maine (320).
They’re working on better batteries and I’m sure this range will eventually be extended but until it is, the Tesla is nothing more than the quintessential model of progressive thinking: an exquisitely thought-out, good looking project that goes nowhere, expensively. Best of all, it can be owned only by the rich, and comes with a cash tribute from the middle class. Perfection!
A flood of $5 million + listings are coming on, but mostly in odd, unpopular corners of town, and unlikely, I think, to bring immediate rewards to their owners, so we’ll leave discussion of them to a future date when time will have mellowed their prices.
But here’s a house that I saw last Thursday, 5 Lake Drive South, in Riverside, $3.150 million. Good price, good neighborhood, beautiful house. The owners took an existing house and tore it down, rebuilding on the foundation and building a bright, airy home with old fashioned trim touches: bullseye moldings and the like. Absolutely unique and very much not cookie-cutter colonial. With the caveat that often the more I like a house, the longer it sticks around on the market, I’m pretty sure this will be gone within the week.
The one objection I can see is that the very height that gives this home a fantastic view across the station pond and brings in the breeze means that it would be a bit of a schlep upstairs from the garage, with three kids in strollers and 15 reusable hemp bags stuffed with Whole Food carrots. Live with it, or tell your nanny to do the heavy lifting while you go to the gym for your own workout. There’s a great mudroom/entrance on the ground floor where you can stash kids and food and deal with them in stages. Or Old Greenwich residents might consider leaving their own FEMA/Savageau tree houses and moving here: compared to what Greenwich has in mind for the OG Flood Zone, these steps will seem like just the merest of handicap ramps.
All kidding aside, this is a wonderful house and I think listing agent Ann Simpson did an excellent job pricing it. I’m curious to see if the market agrees.