Last year ended with a whimper on Wall Street. The S&P 500 was down 1% for the year, down 4% from its all-time high in May, and no higher than it was 13 months ago at the end of QE3. The Wall Street shysters and their mainstream media mouthpieces declare 2016 to be a rebound year, with stocks again delivering double digit returns. When haven’t they touted great future returns. They touted them in 2000 and 2007 too. No one earning their paycheck on Wall Street or on CNBC will point out the most obvious speculative bubble in history. John Hussman has been pointing it out for the last two years as the Fed created bubble has grown ever larger. Those still embracing the bubble will sit down to a banquet of consequences in 2016.

At the peak of every speculative bubble, there are always those who have persistently embraced the story that gave the bubble its impetus in the first place. As a result, the recent past always belongs to them, if only temporarily. Still, the future inevitably belongs to somebody else. By the completion of the market cycle, no less than half (and often all) of the preceding speculative advance is typically wiped out.

Hussman referenced the work of Reinhart & Rogoff when they produced their classic This Time is Different. Every boom and bust have the same qualities. The hubris and arrogance of financial “experts” and government apparatchiks makes them think they are smarter than those before them. They always declare this time to be different due to some new technology or reason why valuations don’t matter. The issuance of speculative debt and seeking of yield due to Federal Reserve suppression of interest rates always fuels the boom and acts as the fuse for the inevitable explosive bust.

In 2009, during the depths of the last crisis that followed such speculation, economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff detailed the perennial claim that feeds these episodes in their book, This Time is Different:

“Our immersion in the details of crises that have arisen over the past eight centuries and in data on them has led us to conclude that the most commonly repeated and most expensive investment advice ever given in the boom just before a financial crisis stems from the perception that ‘this time is different.’ That advice, that the old rules of valuation no longer apply, is usually followed up with vigor. Financial professionals and, all too often, government leaders explain that we are doing things better than before, we are smarter, and we have learned from past mistakes. Each time, society convinces itself that the current boom, unlike the many booms that preceded catastrophic collapses in the past, is built on sound fundamentals, structural reforms, technological innovation, and good policy.”

“The essence of the this-time-is-different syndrome is simple. It is rooted in the firmly held belief that financial crises are something that happen to other people in other countries at other times; crises do not happen, here and now to us… If there is one common theme to the vast range of crises we consider, it is that, excessive debt accumulation, whether it be by the government, banks, corporations, or consumers, often poses greater systemic risks than it seems during a boom.”

The third speculative boom in the last fifteen years fueled by Federal Reserve idiocy is about to become a the third bust in the last fifteen years. The unwashed masses who believe what they are told by CNBC are going to be pretty pissed off when they lose half their retirement savings again. None of their highly paid financial advisors are telling them to expect 0% returns over the next twelve years, but that is their fate. The numbers don’t lie over the long haul.

My view on “this time” is clear. I remain convinced that the U.S. financial markets, particularly equities and low-grade debt, are in a late-stage top formation of the third speculative bubble in 15 years. On the basis of the valuation measures most strongly correlated with actual subsequent market returns (and that have fully retained that correlation even across recent market cycles), current extremes imply 40-55% market losses over the completion of the current market cycle, with zero nominal and negative real total returns for the S&P 500 on a 10-12 year horizon. These are not worst-case scenarios, but run-of-the-mill expectations.

Hussman recently saw the brilliant take down of Wall Street – The Big Short – and thought it was a highly accurate portrayal of the rampant criminality of the Wall Street banks. They created fraudulent mortgage products, doled them out to suckers, and created complex toxic derivatives, selling them to clients while shorting them at the same time. Hussman’s only problem with the movie was that it left the true villain off the hook with nary a mention. Wall Street could not and would not have created the trillions of fraudulent products if the Federal Reserve had not kept interest rates at 1% and had performed their regulatory obligations of overseeing the banks.

The answer is straightforward: as the bubble expanded toward its inevitable collapse, the role of Wall Street was to create a massive supply of new “product” in the form of sketchy mortgage-backed securities, but the demand for that product was the result of the Federal Reserve’s insistence on holding interest rates down after the tech bubble crashed, starving investors of safe Treasury returns, and driving them to seek higher yields elsewhere.

See, the Fed reacted to the collapse of the tech bubble and the accompanying recession holding short-term rates to just 1%, provoking yield-seeking by income-starved investors. They found that extra yield in seemingly “safe” mortgage securities. But as the demand outstripped the available supply, Wall Street rushed to create more product, and generate associated fees, by lending to anyone with a pulse (hence “teaser” loans offering zero interest payments for the first 2 years, and ads on TV and radio hawking “No income documentation needed! We’ll get you approved fast!”; “No credit? No problem! You have a loan!”; “Own millions of dollars in real estate with no money down!”). The loans were then “financially engineered” to make the resulting mortgage bonds appear safer than the underlying credits were. The housing bubble was essentially a massive, poorly regulated speculative response to Federal Reserve actions.

And now the Fed has done it again. The stock market on most valuation measures is the most overvalued in world history. The rolling tsunami is about to wipe away the life savings of millions for the third time in fifteen years.

The current, obscenely overvalued QE-bubble is simply the next reckless response to Federal Reserve actions, which followed the global financial crisis, which resulted when the housing bubble collapsed, which was driven by excessively activist Federal Reserve policy, which followed the collapse of the tech bubble. As my wife Terri put it “It’s like a rolling tsunami.”

The pompous professionals inhabiting the gleaming skyscrapers in the NYC financial district are still arrogantly ignoring the imminent bust headed their way. The Fed juiced gains over the last six years will evaporate just as they did in 2007-2009. Cheerleading for and denying the existence of the bubble is a common them among those whose paycheck depends upon them doing so.

One had to suffer fools parroting things like “being early is the same thing as being wrong” until the collapse demonstrated that, actually no, it’s really not. The 2007-2009 collapse wiped out the entire total return of the S&P 500, in excess of risk-free Treasury bills, all the way back to June 1995.

Since two crashes weren’t enough to teach the lesson, here we are again, at what’s likely to be seen in hindsight as the last gasp of the extended top formation of the third speculative bubble in 15 years. The median stock actually peaked in late-2014.

And now for the bad news. At current market valuations, a run of the mill bust will result in a 50% decline. A bust that puts valuations back to 1982 bear market lows would result in a decline exceeding 75%. Whether it is a violent collapse or long slow decline, there is no doubt that returns over the next decade will be non-existent. This is not good news for Boomers or GenX entering or approaching retirement.

For the S&P 500 to lose half of its value over the completion of the current market cycle would merely be a run-of-the-mill outcome given current extremes. A truly worst-case scenario, at least by post-war standards, would be for the S&P 500 to first lose half of its value, and then to lose another 55% from there, for a 78% cumulative loss, which is what would have to occur in order to reach the 0.45 multiple we observed in 1982. We do not expect that sort of outcome. But to rule out a completely pedestrian 40-55% market loss over the completion of the current cycle is to entirely dismiss market history.At present, investors should expect a 12-year total return from the S&P 500 of essentially zero.

The reckless herd has been in control for the last few years, but their recklessness is going to get them slaughtered. Corporate profits are plunging. Labor participation continues to fall. A global recession is in progress. The strong U.S. dollar is crushing exports and profits of international corporations. Real household income remains stagnant, while healthcare, rent, home prices, education, and a myriad of other daily living expenses relentlessly rises. The world is a powder keg, with tensions rising ever higher in the Middle East, Ukraine, Europe, and China. The lessons of history scream for caution at this moment in time, not recklessness. 2016 will be a year of reckoning for the reckless herd.

There’s no question that at speculative extremes, recent history always temporarily belongs to the reckless herd that has ignored concerns about valuation and risk at every turn. Fortunately, the future has always belonged to those who take discipline, analysis, and the lessons of history seriously. Decide which investor you want to be.

Read Hussman’s Weekly Letter

109 thoughts on “THIS TIME ISN’T DIFFERENT”

  1. “For twelve years, you have been asking: Who is John Galt? This is John Galt speaking. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are perishing-you who dread knowledge -I am the man who will now tell you.”

  2. Nassim “Black Swan” Taleb On The Real Financial Risks Of 2016

    Authored by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, publish op-ed via The Wall Street Journal,

    Worry less about the banking system, but commodities, epidemics and climate volatility could be trouble

    How should we think about financial risks in 2016?

    First, worry less about the banking system. Financial institutions today are less fragile than they were a few years ago. This isn’t because they got better at understanding risk (they didn’t) but because, since 2009, banks have been shedding their exposures to extreme events. Hedge funds, which are much more adept at risk-taking, now function as reinsurers of sorts. Because hedge-fund owners have skin in the game, they are less prone to hiding risks than are bankers.

    This isn’t to say that the financial system has healed: Monetary policy made itself ineffective with low interest rates, which were seen as a cure rather than a transitory painkiller. Zero interest rates turn monetary policy into a massive weapon that has no ammunition. There’s no evidence that “zero” interest rates are better than, say, 2% or 3%, as the Federal Reserve may be realizing.

    I worry about asset values that have swelled in response to easy money. Low interest rates invite speculation in assets such as junk bonds, real estate and emerging market securities. The effect of tightening in 1994 was disproportionately felt with Italian, Mexican and Thai securities. The rule is: Investments with micro-Ponzi attributes (i.e., a need to borrow to repay) will be hit.

    Though “another Lehman Brothers” isn’t likely to happen with banks, it is very likely to happen with commodity firms and countries that depend directly or indirectly on commodity prices. Dubai is more threatened by oil prices than Islamic State. Commodity people have been shouting, “We’ve hit bottom,” which leads me to believe that they still have inventory to liquidate. Long-term agricultural commodity prices might be threatened by improvement in the storage of solar energy, which could prompt some governments to cancel ethanol programs as a mandatory use of land for “clean” energy.

    We also need to focus on risks in the physical world. Terrorism is a problem we’re managing, but epidemics such as Ebola are patently not. The most worrisome fact of 2015 was the reaction to the threat of Ebola, with the media confusing a multiplicative disease with an ordinary one and shaming people for overreacting. Cancer rates cannot quadruple from one month to the next; epidemics can. We are clearly unprepared to deal with such threats.

    Finally, climate volatility will produce some nonlinear effects, and these will be compounded in our interconnected world, in which disruptions are more acute. The East Coast blackout of August 2003 was nothing compared with what may come.

  3. “Worry less about the banking system, but commodities, epidemics and climate volatility could be trouble”


    Climate volatility eh? That must be code for “marxist shit bags stealing more of my hard earned dough because they think they can control the weather”???

    I think Nassim should stick to writing about the markets.

  4. Unknown to most people, the Fed has a congressionally mandated 5 trillion dollar cap on it’s balance sheet. When the balance sheet was down around a trillion, it was discussed all the time. Now it’s hard to find on google. Without that cap, it would just have kept counterfeiting away. We are nearing a huge pivot point in the global niggertown. What if the new president doesn’t want to play ponzi? What if returns become once again tied to actual earned profits? This is a year to spend converting paper into physical assets. Returns should take a back seat to asset preservation. All that excess liquidity might have staved off the day of reckoning, but it now has created it’s own set of problems. It’s about time the financial industries start being forced to eat their own seed corn. Buckle up.

  5. These corrupt greedy fucks have been missing the nail with the hammer and hitting their thumb for so long that they can’t feel the pain anymore. One can only imagine what they will come up with once the well is dry and their families are having popcorn and old ramen noodles for supper. Jump fuckers, I promise we wont catch you as gravity works its magic.

  6. John Galt: I respect the personal sentiment; the astroturfing across political and economic spheres, not so much.
    Libertarian economic fantasies stoked by think tank money is conspicuously behind the deregulatory movements which led to the monstrous top tier financial institutions, the same which had no problem taking “gubmint handouts” when threatened with dissolution in 2008-2009.
    Equally, the true John Galt figure in the Great Depression wasn’t some everyman, but a scion of one of the leading political and wealth-class families recognizing the greatest danger to capitalism: unrestrained capitalists.
    Even as this 2nd Gilded Age draws towards fin de siecle, where is the pseudo-Marxist scion of the upper classes who will save capitalism from itself?

  7. THIS is actually the world that most people want, a world where they don’t have to think, where they can play and do drugs all day, where someone else takes on the responsibility of thinking and producing. They WANT a playground with lots of sex, video games, violent sports, and alcohol.

    “That world is not the product of your sins, it is the product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I-I am the man who has granted you your wish.”

    —- Atlas Shrugged

  8. SPX is down 2% right now after China’s major index fell 7% and had trading halted.

    As usual, there are two paths ahead (three actually) from which Mr. Market can choose. With the Williams %R hitting -100 for all practical purposes (on a daily chart), if this decline holds for today, either we’re at the end of a long consolidation and tomorrow will be an upside reversal (followed by a rally to new all time nominal highs) or we’re entering a meltdown phase.

    No way to know in advance, sadly, and there’s no clear trade for me now. My shorts ride for the moment.

    Taleb continues to promote a central Narrative, that the banking system is not at risk.

    This is pure crap.

    The current tens, hundreds or thousand of TRILLIONS of dollars of IOU’s in existence is the largest synthetic short sale of any currency EVER.

    Prior Extraordinary Pop Del & Madness of Crowds (EPopDaMoC) all were delimited by MONEY being A SINGLE THING (gold, or silver usually.)

    This one, decades in length, has has more room to run because Money is paper and IOU’s, and the IOU component was a feedback loop in growing more IOU’s.

    It remains my contention that eventually this IOU house of cards will utterly collapse. The top layer, Junk Bonds (weakest debtors’ IOU’s) is in full collapse now.

    Eventually this should spread to corporates, then weaker governments, then stronger governments, each layer pancaking onto the lower one in a step-wise progression.

    The second-to-lowest layer is cash currency…in this case mostly dollars in paper form.

    The bottom layer is physical possession of actual capital (land, plant&equipment, defensible patents and manufacturing processes, and possibly gold/silver…although I’m not all that sure about the latter two.) The problem is that the politics of the bust phase are likely to include cannibalism democracy where the mob votes in rulers who promise to strip the owners of capital of their wealth (not just their incomes.)

    The entire world is going to have its Argentina Moment. Holding onto wealth is going to be very difficult.

    The real concern is if cannibalism democracy moves to zombie democracy, where the mob begins to eat the brains (smart people.)

    Smart people better be VERY well armed.

  9. From:

    Santa Claus comes in many shapes and sizes. This Christmas he came to our family in the form of a Great Aunt who thought my kids’ school pictures were cute and therefore she would spoil them. A multitude of X-Box games appeared as if by magic beneath the tree. But the favorite one by a wide margin was Minecraft.

    Therefore my son spent Christmas Morning mainlining Minecraft as if he were Slash or Duff during The Guns N’ Roses Heroin Era. He began to get really good at the lower levels. His adorable little sister grew bored with her Pony Castle and came to see what her brother was doing. She then spoke the evil magic words that set today’s tale into motion. She said “Me TOO!!!”

    My son had no intention of unplugging brain from X-Box, but his little sister was determined. No Minecraft character ever survives having the X-Box violently unplugged from the wall. He had to give in and let his sister take a turn. She did terribly. She got slaughtered. The sad, sad boy had to start all over again from scratch. This gave his dad the opportunity to impart a fundamental ¡HATE TRUTH! It was time to teach this innocent young child that socialism sucks.

    While my son stood there outraged at his sister, I twisted in the Rapier of Unfairness. “You two have to take turns every 15 minutes, and I don’t want to hear ANY arguments.” I explained.

    So my son started off and spent 15 minutes a-strikin’ and a-killin’. He built a pretty tough guy with a collection of cool items in his pack. Then it was his hapless sister’s turn. She managed to roll down a volcano’s slope and into a puddle of lava. Anyone who was ever worked as a fry cook at McDonalds knows what happened to the Minecraft character my son had lovingly sculpted after that. So my son started over again. His sister did a little better the second time and gotten eaten by wolves in the forest.

    At this point I intervened before my adorable daughter got her brains exposed to the atmosphere over a dumb video game and sat my children down. I explained to him that this is what socialism and fairness are all about. The talented and hard-working people don’t get to enjoy what they create until they have shared those gains with the least capable and least intelligent. As long as socialists gain power, you will never be allowed to enjoy nice things because it is unfair to people who are too stupid to create them. You are a slave to people who are too incompetent to shine your shoes.

    Afterwards, I separated them by playing a game with my daughter and let my son plug back in. It is my wish for the new year that both of my children will remember that Christmas Morning when their loving father tried his best to give them the gift of Hate Knowledge. The ¡HATE KNOWLEDGE! that socialism in all its guises yea verily Sucks!
    01/04/2016Author Brett Stevens Categories Politics

  10. SPX breaking below 2000 at 9:04 Central time.

    The daily EMA’s are “hooking.” Given the rest of the chart’s “look,” I think the benefit of the doubt has to be given to Total Meltdown.

    Some people posit that this last couple years has been a massive head-and-shoulders pattern. If they are right (no way to know in advance) then the SPX should plunge toward 1600 in very short order (weeks, or a couple months at most.)


  11. Remember that train roaring toward the precipice beyond the tressles’ curve, as we’re all shackled to the passenger seats,………enjoy the ride

  12. DOW’s only down 362 last I looked.

    If the PPT is still any good it will recover quite a bit by the end of the day and loose only a little -maybe even gain- by the end of the week.

    If they aren’t any good any more then buy as much as you can as fast as you can now or you’ll miss a big tax write off on your taxes this year.

  13. Anon, the PPT has existed in every market. Pools of Big Money tried to stem the carnage in 1930, too. It didn’t work.

    Markets go up until they don’t. Then they go down until they don’t. It’s an illusion to think that anyone actually controls them. If they were subject to actual control, they’d only go up.

    We’ve lived our lives in the largest credit-driven asset inflation in history. We don’t know any other way. It teaches us to think this is normal.

    It’s not.

    The key, as I now see it, is the bond market. Bond prices rose (and interest rates fell) for 30 years. During that time stocks went on massive tears higher three times and 50% busts twice (so far.)

    The behavior of stocks, metals, commodities and real estate all simply reflected vast dollar-based liquidity sloshing around from market to market, but the KEY was bonds because in a fiat money environment DEBT = WEALTH. As long as bond prices fell (meaning that no matter how much debt was issued, it was tantamount to printing money) the reservoir of “monetary wealth” kept filling and that sloshed from market to market creating booms and busts one after another.

    Bond prices topped over the last couple years and interest rates hit the limit…ZERO.

    Bond issuance continued without raising rates much, so the pool of total dollar wealth kept getting deeper and wider until now it’s a veritable OCEAN of IOU’s that represent WEALTH.

    As far as the eye can see, people are sloshing around in dollar wealth…but it’s all just mass psychology sharing a belief that the IOU’s are “money good,” their issuers are solvent forever, Amazon is worth 1/3 of a trillion dollars, etc.

    As long as the mania persists all this silliness can, too.

    Men with dicks can claim they’re girls and your employer will fire you for refusing to pay homage to their delusions. The only way deviants can be more insistent on their fellows enabling their deviancy is if bestiality, polygamy/polyandry and pedophilia are the next waves of insanity.

    If bond prices remain high, even these insanities are apt to get some support. (I hope someone rips the guts out of those who do so, however, and I’ll volunteer for the firing squad if given the chance.)

    The key is NOT the stock market. It’s bonds (and by axiom, interest rates.) If JNK keeps falling (I lack long term chart data for a surrogate of shaky debt) and especially if bond weakness begins to spread, then we may finally be at the point of inflection.

    If so, the underlying poverty of the last 50 years’ public policy and economic insanity will soon be revealed as the 50 year compounded increase in illusory wealth will simply evaporate.

    Worried about Wealth Inequality? Soon most everyone will be poor, when the tide goes out from under bonds.

  14. DC has been silent since August about the markets. I’ve been interested to hear his thoughts. There are some on various threads who say”I am tired of gloom and doom, you have been saying it for years”. A little doom today if you are in the markets. Like your comments DC.

  15. Hussman notes what I’ve said for some time:

    The 3rd time will be The Big One.

    The only way to prevent a low (capitulation) from occurring is to teach people to NOT CAPITULATE.

    What lesson have people learned since 2000? If you sell, you miss the recovery.

    The markets can collapse on very little volume. Prices drop when TWO PEOPLE agree to transact at a lower price even as EVERYONE ELSE does NOTHING.

    Most people will DO NOTHING. They will lose everything.

  16. wow…gone are the silly insults,

    the boys are cooking with gas,

    very impressive brain trust,

    much respect issued.

    And, thank you.

  17. Bea, that’s the problem. Those of us who already “did something” mostly got our asses handed to us. I will be writing capital loss carry-overs off my taxes for years to come, so “something” did I do. (facepalm.) I haven’t had a net gain on which to pay taxes since 1998, if I had to guess. It’s been that bad, and that long. Some people just can’t help but tilt at windmills.

    I wish I’d never opened a brokerage account.

    I never in my wildest dreams imagined that “How High Is UP?” would go on for 20 years starting in 1995.

    I don’t know for sure this is even “the big one.” For all I know, the mania is still in force and we’ll be treated to an unknown number (in advance) of MORE stupidity, higher stocks, more IOU’s, etc.

    Life’s an adventure. That’s the only thing I know for sure.

  18. Nassim “Black Swan” Taleb .says not to worry about the banks…Hmmm…did he forget the trillions and trillions of derivatives that the banks have on the books ?

  19. D.C. said ” it’s an illusion to think that anyone actually controls them.”.

    D.C. I have to disagree. Heck high speed training is one form of controlling the market .I really doubt that a trader fat fingered his key board when the Dow dropped 1000 points back in May of 2010 . Or when Brad Sherman said that CONgress was threatened that the market would drop 2000 or more points in one day in order to get the bailouts the Banks wanted .

  20. “This is not good news for Boomers or GenX entering or approaching retirement.” Any Boomer with a retirement portfolio should be in mostly cash at this point in their lives. Maybe 10% of their portfolio should be in stocks even if they were bullish. 30% bonds/real estate, and at least 50% in cash/cash equivalents. Anyone who is 60 years old and holding mostly stocks is just a fool and deserves to part with their money.

  21. For such an intelligent website, I find the whole climate change denial thing that seems to be so prevalent amongst the readers here rather strange. On what kind of stuff are you basing your views? Why would you disagree with the scientists who are studying this?

    1. Captured scientists who need grant money from the government. This intelligent website is skeptical of all storylines. The climate changes. It always has and always will. There is absolutely nothing government drones can do to change it. They just want to tax the living fuck out of us.

  22. Climate change is a religion, I’m quite happy with my own casual brand of christianity. Tell you what, jynn, you come up with something positive I can do to save mother earth BESIDES paying more taxes, I will be happy to listen. Get back to me

  23. JYNN…when you think of Climate Chnage ( also known a Globull Warming ) ask yourself a question.

    Did we have an Ice Age ( yah know before the man had facories etc ) …the answer is of course yes .

    How did it end….it got warmer. How did it get warmer if we didn’t have any factories,cars etc to warm up the Earth…..because the Climate is constantly changing…with or with out man’s intervention .

    I keep reading about rising sea levels . I ask a Climate Change person…you’re afraid of rising sea levels…yes is the answer .

    Well here in South Carolina they’ve found whale bones,sea shells etc in the Columbia area,110 miles from the ocean. How did that happen ? Oh that’s right at one time the sea shore was 110 miles or more inland . WOW how did that happen…oh that’s right the seas have risen and receded many times over a Millennia or more

  24. I agree with all of you to some extent,

    – yes, the government likely see it as a great opportunity to tax everyone
    – yes, there are likely some captured scientists
    – No there is bugger all you, me or even governments can do to reverse it. I think the human species is pretty screwed
    – yes, the climate is constantly changing

    but none of this proves man-made climate change is not happening.

    If hypothetically we were in a natural warming phase of 1C per 1000 years, and we have now accelerated that to 3C per 100 years, that is man made disastrous climate change.

    I don’t see how anyone can refute the following logic:

    – CO2 is a warming greenhouse gas and global temps track CO2 levels,
    – CO2 is currently around 390ppm and rising at vastly higher rate than has it ever has as a result of human activities.
    – in the last cooling / warming cycles spanning more than 400000, it never got above 300ppm and reached that level slowly.

    Please see the following page with a chart showing what I mean 3/4 of the way down.

    fwiw my brother, who is one of the most honest people I know, is working for the UN being sent to many different countries to best advise them how to deal with the coming climate change. He has studied this stuff and on a personal level know he would never have gotten into this field if he found out it was a fraud.

  25. JYNN – I’m in complete agreement re climate denialism on these forums. My suggestion: Don’t even go there. I believe in/acknowledge in many conspiracies in the sense of people conspiring for particular outcomes (e.g., central banks, big pharma, etc.). The danger with the mindset, though, is seeing conspiracy everywhere – if evidence supports the theory is giving legitimacy (proof!), but if there’s any contradictory evidence it’s just dismissed as “part of the conspiracy.” The ridiculous dismissal of so much science astounds and offends my sensibilities, but that’s not what I come here for. I go to environmental blogs for the latest on that. Just like I wouldn’t come here to get advice on how to breakup with a narcissist, I won’t listen to these folks about climate science.
    (Now I’m curious to see if there’s any vitriol from expressing my counter opinion.)

  26. Jynn, you manned up nicely, so let me respond. Co2 is a warming greenhouse gas. No, it is a trace gas, and being a trace gas, it would have no measurable effect on temperature. Global temp track Co2 levels. Hard to find a correlation, I’m not buying it. Co2 is currently at 390 parts per million (isn’t that .000,000,390?) Like I said, trace gas. And rising at a vastly higher rate than it ever has. Come on, we haven’t studied this for fifty years. And is the result of human activities. Uh huh. In the last 400,000 year cycle it never got over 300 ppm and reached that level slowly. That’s some good data. Sorry, jynn, dad was a meteorologist for NOAA, I watched this whole plan hatch from a front row seat. Thanks for playing.

  27. I, too, rarely get involved in the Climate Change discussions. Jynn, you seem reasonable, but I can refute at least on eof your irrefutable points: Namely, ice core samples going back tens of thousands of years show that CO2 levels LAG temperature increases, in other words, historically temperature increases CAUSE CO2 levels to rise, not the other way around. This is NEVER mentioned in any way, shape or form because it does not fit the narrative. Another thing never mentioned is the ONLY reason we have a climate and that is the giant ball of fusion 93 million miles away. This ball, know as the sun, recently posted here and let us all know that it goes through cycles, in other words, it is not a constant, though it is treated as such by ALL AGW models.

    Of course, there is SOME effect we have on the climate. To say it is completely Anthropogenic is beyond absurd and not good science. But people who do not understand science and are intimidated by the very word, use the word like a shield. “It’s settled science” these pundits scream, without realizing that the phrase is in fact an oxymoron. True science is NEVER settled. New evidence is always admitted and continually changes true science.

    So, claims like a made up word (“denialism”) and that to be skeptical is to dismiss are illogical, emotionally driven arguments, while the issuer (in this case OneMoreCup) somehow likes to claim the logical high ground.

    So, again, of course, we are causing SOME change to climate, how could we not. But, next, you will here from some AGW pundit that cow farts are more to blame than cars. Interesting. So, by that rationale, the early settlers actually did the environment a great service by slaughtering millions of buffalo–who, I have no doubt, fart like there is no tomorrow. It is this type of idiocy, while somehow trying to maintain the scientific high-ground, that I cannot stand.

    One more point, we (humans) are fucking up our environment in myriad ways. I am tremendously “environmentally conscious.” In my estimation, even if the very worst scenario of AGW were true, it would still rank no higher than 5th on a scale of how humans are fucking up the planet, behind ocean acidity& pollution (including nuclear), soil erosion and chemical poisoning, burning fucking rain-forests, and the summation of local pollution disasters (smog in cities, lake and river pollution, etc.). So, why is AGW the only one of these that EVER gets national attention? Simple…the govt already taxes our food and our water, they now feel the need to tax the air we breathe. Period.

    I disdain the politicization, hypocrisy and bastardization of science involved in AGW…but I always try to refrain from vitriol and ad hominem. I only ask the same.

  28. just curiuos , im very tired atm , but @ DC do any of your models on financials include POCB’s controlling damn near everything? I mean if central banks control the value, thru increasing or decreasing the amount of currency units in play , thus affecting the perceived value of mostly intangible items like stocks ,bonds, or other financial instruments or even tangibles like PM’s or foodstocks or whatever ,why would anyone invest in anything other than something that would retain it’s value regardless of what POCB’s decree? I’m not trying to be argumentative.
    Honest question from me tho . For example , I need to provide for family , me or whoever .
    I cannot speculate. But I can, thru my labor ,accumulate increasing quantities of particular tangibles , along with an amount of whatever fiat is needed for taxes etc , so that the overall effect is constantly increasing , albeit slowly, to have enough steady stored labor for whatever is needed ?

    I have a terrible time writing articulately sometime , so don’t pick my grammer apart too much lol !

    On climate change , omg! Sun is a definite factor that is not included correctly . If co2 is such a problem lets get rid of it , and all plantlife will die . Look up co2 generators for farming .
    Near as I can tell , the earth is in for a global cooling period , unknown how long that will last tho .
    It appears that all the smog, pollution, man made shit is DELAYING this atm.
    My meandering thoughts … which I m going to go off the deep end here lol , IF ,the world ,was indeed going to go thru a major cooling period , with subsequent ice age etc , AND , you were TPTB, and you wanted a viable population when this time frame was up , would you not want as much genetic human diversity as was possible ? Which would explain the absolutely insane policies of so called governments at this time?
    If it was a survival of the species event , wouldn’t you hedge your bets accordingly ?
    LOL just a cook with too much time on my hands atm , drinking some homebrew and really tired actually , been awake for 32 hours atm .
    But I keep peeling the onion and the core keeps fracturing into many cores that occupy my meager intellect with probability fields that have at least some substance when you look at the data .

    Nothing new under the sun . Whatever )

  29. What is wealth?

    If everyone agreed that sea shells were wealth, couldn’t those who live nearest the sea just take a stroll on the shore and clean up? Yep.

    Why is a share of AMZN worth $633.72 at the moment I just looked? Because all who are inclined to trade it at that moment agree that the price should be a little less than 20 barrels of light crude oil, or a little more than half an oz of gold.

    All of it is simply mass psychology.

    Central banks are an invention that arises when people want to believe something can be created out of nothing, that’s all. They are an effect, not a cause.

    I adhere to a theory I think explains the sine-wave curve of all this; it’s called the Wave Principle. It is based on the idea that we all herd, because people are social animals. There is an entire two-book set to explain it, so I don’t try here. Look up or if you’re curious enough.

    This theory posits that the mood chooses the leaders and the policies, not the other way around. I find it compelling, because history (and markets) are not random. They are clearly patterned. The problem is that the pattern is infinitely variable and thus of limited value in forecasting.

    Markets will fall when they fall. I’m not all that worried about it any more. It is so much more difficult to make money speculating in a bear market that I have little interest left in trying. I have enough money in the market now to just brag about it if I’m right, that’s all. It’s too small an amount to materially affect me.

    Much more fun will be when I think the markets have bottomed. I intend not to miss that again. For now, however, I see no compelling reason to buy stocks or bonds or real estate…and buying gold has proven quite difficult to locate a low risk entry.

    Regarding “climate change,” all I needed to know was that proponents got caught red handed gaming the raw data.


    Anyone who doesn’t understand this is simply not at a level to discuss it. NOAA and the East Anglia people have gotten caught dead-to-rights on this, and Michael Mann refused to share the raw data on which his famous graph was based.

    Sorry, folks, that’s not science.

    I’m a scientist by training (microbiology and biology degrees) and spent years in research and in industry. I know how data is massaged. I know how lies are told via omission.

    AGW is a complete and total fraud, and that is certain because of the very way it is promoted.

    FOR the record, the notion that HIV causes AIDS, too, is a pervasive error pyramid. Here, saturated as we are in the Information Superhighway, we are subject to more Error Pyramids than any time in human history.

    Our problem is not what we don’t know; Our problem is what we think we know that JUST AIN’T SO.

  30. – CO2 is a warming greenhouse gas and global temps track CO2 levels.


    please point me to any evidence of this, a peer reviewed article or whatever hard data, that gives unequivocal proof of this.

    As to why I ask, to prove that temperatures follow a rise in co2 (and not vice versa) you’d have to have dating methods so exact that any reasonable doubt is impossible.

    So far, all I have seen is a correlation. Scientific dogma has it that correlation is not causation.

    Your brother should be able to provide these data.

  31. gm, capitalist economies are based on the idea that you can produce an excess of what you need to live during your “productive years,” turning your excess into some sort of “marker” that others will accept in trade while you are non-productive (i.e., in old age) for what THEY are actively producing.

    What’s the key here:

    All consumption is in real time, here and now.

    It is impossible to consume that which has not yet been produced. A debt can be one of two things: it can be backed by an existing real asset that has real, current and predictable market value or it can be a pledge of some sort of future value or future activity or performance…which by definition has no current market value but may be deemed trustworthy or certain enough that the current debt is deemed “money good.”

    The former of these describes where debt should and does equal wealth.

    The latter of these describes a dangerous, metastatic cancer that has grown to monstrous proportion.

    Debt has risen far, far beyond what is actually backed by real value. Government debt is backed by future taxes levied on FUTURE PEOPLE who work in a FUTURE ECONOMY.

    What could go wrong? Right?

    All that debt today is deemed wealth ONLY because people collectively trust all those issuers and their ability to some day deliver that which is owed.

    What if they can’t?

    I submit that we long ago left the point where delivery was possible. Honest GDP (not the BS one we’re given which includes government spending like it’s producing something) would have to grow by 10%, 15%, maybe even 20% compounded annually to make all the debts in existence today “money good.”

    The problem we face is that we get the system (government, economy, polity, etc.) to which our neighbors acquiesce. Today people accept an Orwellian system that snoops us, cajoles us, threatens us 24 hours a day. They accept that anyone can issue an IOU and whoever holds it is richer by the face value, even if the issuer used the proceeds to buy an African Studies BS degree with a minor in underwater basket weaving. (talk about zero collateral)

    How do we respond?

    Beats me. Stay out of debt. Be skilled. Live simply. All the platitudes familiar to us all.

    Hell, I’m unemployed now, a decade before I expected to “retire.” I’ve probably got an IQ above 130, I’ve a bachelor’s and a master’s degree and 27 years of outside sales experience.

    Yet I’m essentially unemployable.

    Good thing I’ve prepared for this. I’m not missing any meals. But it speaks to how hard I find it to navigate these times.

    I sure as hell don’t have all the answers. I’m not sure I have more than a few….but of those I’m pretty sure.

  32. Re the stock market.

    Still looks impulsive to the downside to me, with action since 11 AM CT yesterday overlapping and corrective.

    Until the market institutes a rally that breaks higher than the lower-low/lower-high trend of the last two months, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the downside.

    I have yet to see conditions mark a solid, tradeworthy LOW, and the last signal for a fairly decent low was on November 13th, and it fizzled before hitting a new high for the move.

    Re Central banks:

    Back in Dec when the Fed’s “decision” was pending, I wrote that if the 3-month T-bill yield was .25% or more the Fed would DEFINITELY raise its rates.

    It was, and the Fed did.

    I also noticed, however, that the chart looked a bit like mid-December’s T-bill rate increase might turn to weakness….and it did. T-bills are yielding 0.20% or so now, after hitting 0.15 a couple days ago. This makes the Fed look like it’s “Too Tight.”

    Wait to see if this sort of complaint begins to surface.

  33. BTW, the whole “Ozone Layer In Danger” thing from a couple decades ago was a complete fraud, too.

    Ozone is a product of sunlight, and the Antarctic “hole” occurs every winter there…and has since the Earth began.

    It never had anything to do with freon.

    Yet here we are with freon-free refrigerants and systems that have half the service life because the replacements are crap.

    We are stuck permanently with legal frameworks that are a product of nothing but superstition, fraud and profiteering.

    Humans are, collectively, like the monkeys on “Monkey Island.”

  34. Drud and Starfcker, I did a bit of digging to find out how it could be possible that warming precedes CO2 increase as I wasn’t aware of those ice core samples. Here is a summation of what I found:

    “When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth’s orbit. The warming causes the oceans to release CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise. Overall, about 90% of the global warming occurs after the CO2 increase.”

    Check out this page if you’re interested in reading more fully. There is also a very good 5 minute video near the top made by a professor of chemistry explaining it all.

  35. One last:

    Another thing we’re stuck with? Onerous regulations on Gun sound suppressors (AKA silencers.)

    Since 1934 Americans have been partly or almost wholly denied a piece of safety equipment that would largely end firearm-related hearing loss.

    Typical firearms produce sound in the 140-160 dB range.
    The best ear plugs reduce sound pressure by about 32 dB.
    Hearing damage occurs WELL below the resultant (for example: 140-32=) 108 dB.

    Suppressors typical work about the same as plugs, so adding one to your gun would reduce its sound pressure to a level where ADDING PLUGS or MUFFS would result in a safe level for your ears.

    Silent, they are not.

    Politicians and bureaucrats who perpetuate the GCA 1934 limits on silencers do so not to “prevent crime” but to keep America’s gun enthusiasts on the path to partial deafness.

    I sincerely hope every single politician in favor of maintaining the bans (like in Illinois) and onerous regulations (at the federal level) contracts a flesh-eating venereal disease that eats away his or her genitalia.

  36. Whenever I see the word “debunked” it usually means that any kind of discussion has ended. Like “settled science” or “law of the land” it’s an attempt to sound authoritative without the work involved.

    There are huge scars on the rocks in Central Park made by a half mile thick glacier. That suggests some major global warming during the neolithic era when mankind had zero impact on the climate. You never hear anyone talking about going back to those good old days, do you?

    Climates change. Solar activity, polar shifts, interstellar flak, orbital disturbances, volcanism- all of them contribute to our ever changing climate and like human beings, all of them are normal phenomenon. Forcing people to pay a tax to try and alter the climate is one of the absurd propositions ever made and that they are done by people who jet around the globe with their heavily armed Praetorian guards, dining on stuffed hummingbirds and caviar makes it all the more entertaining. Especially when their ground troops do all the heavy lifting.

    Debunk that.

  37. Jynn, they ain’t listening. Why engage? There’s plenty of science out there, over 30 years worth in a dozen different disciplines, but these folks are choosing to ignore it or throw in with the deniers. It’s like teaching a pig to smoke…Why waste your time. Though, I appreciate your attempt and your calm tone. You’re more courageous than me.
    People are invested in their points of view and can look on the internet for sites to support their POV. There’s certainly plenty out there to support any notion, regardless of its substance.
    Regardless of their denialism, they’ll still suffer the impacts, so there’s that.
    It’s precisely these kinds of comments about climate change that frustrate me. I’d like to point my family and friends towards some of these blogs about the market and economy, but I fear they’ll read the comments and make assumptions that the authors hold similar beliefs.

  38. OneMoreCup gets one thing right–there is no use engaging and why I almost never do. I do not know what the cumulative effect of all human industry has been on the planet…unlike many other I do not pretend to.

    I do know that there is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS an ulterior motive whenever the government and MSM opens its collective mouth. It is the same with AGW. Also, no can refute what HSF says above and no one even mentions my point about there being far more serious ecological disasters looming. The AGW narrative is all about taxation, money and control. This is true no matter what the science is or what the actual future may hold.

    If, even if, AGW was ENTIRELY Anthropogenic and if, even if, the government truly and genuinely had the best possible interest and only the best possible interest of humanity and the future of planet earth at heart–there is NOTHING in the history of government that would suggest that any attempt by the government to solve the AGW problem would not make it much worse. War on poverty – dreadful failure by all accounts. War on drugs – dreadful failure by all accounts. War on Terror – are you fucking kidding me?

    But, of course, with AGW it is clear that the government will save us…HURRAY!

  39. You’re right OneMoreCup, I’ll refrain (probably) from any more comments here. HardScrabble, sorry for using the word ‘debunked’, I agree it suggests an automatic win without requiring much proof to back it up. As I said earlier, I’m not trying to suggest the climate hasn’t changed drastically in the past, and some of the earths previous natural climate change also likely would have done serious damage to the human species.

    At this point I think perhaps a little light relief is in order. Check out my hero, George Carlin talking about the environment:

  40. Hey Jynn, howz about you provide some proof that the Earth’s orbit changes when it comes out of an Ice Age. Do be sure to provide the source for GIFUCKINGNORMOUS source of energy it would take to change our orbit. What is the impetus for this change? What causes it to revert back? Can you even define “orbit”?

    If the morons in this country (world) had even the slightest fucking bit of science education or just some idea of what science is, we wouldn’t have idiotic BS like this clogging up the works.

    You see kiddies, our owners want…….no………NEED us to be dumb as posts so they can foist this shit on us. Books are the antidote.

  41. Drud, Amen to that. Read a darkly funny thing other day written by Greer at Archdruid report, that the MSM were celebrating a big victory at the COP-21 climate talk in Paris when in fact all the actually agreed on was slowing down, not the output of greenhouse gases, but slowing down the rate of INCREASE. And the MSM cheerleads this like the world is saved.

    Also agree that humans are fucking the world in all sorts of disastrous ways, but my opinion is that climate change is the biggie that’s going to get our descendants.

  42. Servant, so you expect that the earths orbit should be exactly circular with no variation? We’re talking about nature here, no straight lines, no perfect circles. So yeh of course there are cycles, one is the degree of tilt of earth’s axis , affecting severity of seasons, another is the roundness of the orbit, which interact with each other to create cycles of ice ages and warming. No extra energy needed, just a natural cycle. And no, I didn’t just look this up, I remember it from university.

    It seems your angry post was intended to convey superior knowledge but to me you just come out sounding ignorant. You have a very strong opinion but you’ve clearly not even looked this stuff up.

  43. My post was meant to convey the need for you to think critically rather than regurgitate bullshit. I’ve been a lifelong amateur astronomer. I study astronomy for FUN because I enjoy it, not to get a piece of paper signifying I could accurately regurgitate info given to me by someone else.

    Tilt of the Earth’s axis has nothing to do with it’s orbit. Uranus’ axis is tilted 97 degrees yet it has a stable orbit. Earth’s orbit is extremely stable and has been for a very long time.

    Don’t believe everything you’re told………even what I say. Question everything. Our govts and the owners of this planet thrive on our ignorance. As HSF says, anytime claims are made that something is “settled” is just an attempt to stifle the discussion.

    I’m off to the salt mines. BBL.

    1. Looks like Jynn doesn’t like facts or real data. Storylines and her brother’s opinion trump reality. You lose.

  44. @Jynn, no, I don’t expect the Earth’s orbit to be exactly circular. As a matter of fact I KNOW that it is not. Besides the decades of armchair self education on the subject of astronomy, the simple fact that educated, critical thinking humans, can launch a spacecraft from Earth and hit landing and close approach targets like Pluto using the ephemeris (look it up) of Earth’s orbit developed and refined by centuries of detailed and precise observation proves beyond any doubt that Earth’s orbit is EXTREMELY stable.

    Nature DOES have perfect circles and straight lines. Want examples? Drop a sphere into a calm body of water and watch perfect circles emanate repeatedly from the center. Many planetary nebulae seem to be perfect circles. Most stars appear to be perfectly circular or spherical. If you think that straight lines and even perfect 90 degree angles don’t exist then you need to look into crystallography and crystal twinning or simply study gemstone formation. Hell, just look at a snowflake……straight lines galore! Not only do straight lines exist but perfectly flat planes exist. Atoms aren’t arranged willy nilly!

    You are correct that the tilt of the Earth’s axis affects the seasons on Earth but that tilt is not variable and has nothing to with the “severity of seasons”. You might be dumbfounded to know that when it’s winter in the Northern hemisphere, the Earth is closest to the Sun in our extremely stable orbit and when it’s summer in the northern hemisphere the Earth is farther away from the Sun. Earth’s orbit traces an ellipse around the Sun, not a circle. More proof needed? Look into what causes a total eclipse of the Sun and an annular eclipse of the Sun.

    You calling me ignorant is the height of hypocrisy. You are the perfect example of why the world is so fucked up…….you just regurgitate false information rather than using the lump of fat between your ears (yes, the brain is primarily composed of fat, look it up) to vet the information you’re given. You’re just a sheep like billions of others. As long as you have TV and a piece of iCrap to stare at you’ll remain ignorant BY CHOICE! It’s an honor to be called ignorant by you. Really! And yeah, I’m angry because there is far too much willful ignorance in the world. The corrupt governments and real owners of this planet NEED you to be ignorant to carry out their plans which explains why you took astronomy in “University” and escaped with ZERO practical knowledge of the most basic aspects of it. Congratulations! The sad part is that you think you’re educated and yet, you presumably have the ability to vote for people who recognize how to use your ignorance in their favor. Enjoy!

  45. @Jynn, I’m sure you understand how scientific models work…….basically you input data, the model crunches the data and spits out a result. Envision for a moment you’re using a calculator to compute your paycheck. You add up the hours worked, multiply the result by your rate of pay, subtract X amount for retirement contributions, subtract some percentage for taxes etc to arrive at a final result. If you happen to put a decimal point in the wrong place or exclude one or add one by mistake, your calculations are going to be off right? Same goes for the digits themselves… wrong digit throws off the entire calculation making the result unequivocally wrong and useless.

    Here’s a little something you can do to determine if the data used the climate models is accurate. I did exactly this myself. The climate model uses temperature data gathered from all over the globe. A large part of this data comes from NWS & NOAA approved weather monitoring stations. Guidlines exist as to how the stations are to be constructed, situated and equipped. (you can look these guidelines up) If a station does not meet the guidelines, data gathered by those stations is not entered into official records for statistical purposes because the data cannot be trusted.

    In my little corner of paradise there are several stations included in the global warming models. One in particular caught my attention on a college campus where we hold our local astronomy club meetings. When this station was first established it was in an open, grassy field. Over the years as the college expanded buildings were erected in this open grassy field altering natural wind and air circulation patterns. A black asphalt parking lot was paved all around and under this weather station. The station which once met guidelines no longer does and has not for several decades.

    You don’t have to be a genius to know that walking barefoot in a grassy field is much cooler than walking barefoot on black asphalt on a hot, sunny day. You also don’t have to be a genius to know that brick buildings and asphalt collect and store solar radiation (heat) during the day and release it at night.

    Guess what? That individual weather station shows a definite increase in average temperatures beginning in the 1970’s that coincide perfectly with the additions of the buildings and parking lot. As you might have guessed by now, the much vaunted climate “scientists”, (I use that term loosely) included the data from that station in their model supporting global warming even though it was compromised and anyone with a decent high school education could see that. Now if these “scientists” that the global warming community worships so much included flawed data from even ONE source, it invalidates the data spit out by their model and brings every piece of data used into question.

    Any honest or legitimate scientist would immediately retract their results and begin vetting the data used to build the model but these retards, with full cooperation of tax hungry governments did exactly the opposite and doubled down on the stupid. Does the East Anglia climate scandal ring any bells?

    You can research the weather monitoring stations in your area that were included in the model too. Yes, you’ll have to do some digging and it will take some time and maybe a few field trips to investigate these things. Unfortunately, arriving at the truth involves more that tuning into CNN or watching an Al Gore movie or trusting what you read on your iCrap and it might not make you popular with your friends but truth is ALWAYS worth it.

  46. @Jynn, yes! If you believe that tilt of the Earth’s axis affects the “severity of seasons” then what you learned in University is bullshit!

    I use a simple ping pong ball with a toothpick through the middle and a bare light bulb to illustrate to grade school kids how orbital mechanics causes the seasons on Earth. Whether any given season is slightly warmer or colder or cloudier or windier or sunnier has absolutely NOTHING to do with the the tilt of the Earth’s axis.

    The answers to severity of climate have to do with fluid dynamics of both liquids and gases on Earth and heat radiation from the Sun driving them. The heat radiation from the Sun varies quite a bit. For starters, read about the Maunder Minimum.

    Willfully ignorant is no way to go through life. Besides, learning is fun!

  47. Correction to my comment @7:14am:

    Tilt of the Earth’s axis doesn’t *affect* seasons, it causes them.

  48. The way it has worked- at least in my lifetime- has been that an authority will pronounce an alleged fact, i.e. anthropogenic global climate change is real and a threat to the planet- and that alleged fact will be parroted repeatedly via the institutions of the State, the MSM, academia, et al. As responses to the claim come in they will either be ignored, dismissed without consideration, ridiculed or as a final option, told that no further input is necessary since “the science is settled” or “97% of scientists agree”.

    The longer I live, the more information I am able to gather and assess and as I discover relevant information that disinclines me to accept the Official Story(tm) the more certain I become that the claims- if not false- are immaterial to the positions or solutions offered.

    Let’s take the Climate Change argument. No one can argue against it because it takes place, has taken place, will continue to take place both before, during and after mankind has been on the planet. Everyone can agree to that. So what exactly is the issue? That it is getting warmer. So you point out that it got MUCH warmer when mankind played zero role in the warming yet we now enjoy a very hospitable climate, how was that warming good but this one bad? “One is natural and the other is man-made”, they will say as if man is not a part of nature. In most cases, the AGW advocate will be an urbanite, an academic or someone who lives and works in a decidedly UNNATURAL MAN-MADE environment and is a major contributor to the very problems they rail against. I am a farmer and I sequester more carbon in a month than most people do in a lifetime. I work in accordance with the seasons and natural lighting, am off grid, self sufficient, etc and yet my input and data are dismissed as somehow “unscientific” despite rigorous observation- what I always understood to be the hallmark of science.

    I agree with with Jynn that you aren’t likely to change people’s minds. What they ought to be doing, if they really cared and wanted to make a real contribution, would be to get out of their cubicle and get back to an agrarian lifestyle that offsets the problems they see rather than trying to get government to dig ever deeper into my threadbare pockets while hypocritically jetting from Paris to DC in their private jets with their armored limos and heavily armed bodyguards to sip champagne and eat caviar on our collective dime while pretending that they give a shit about people or the environment. It would be laughable if it weren’t so insulting, yet not one of these so-called advocates haunts their message boards and forums trying to shame them into compliance, do they?

    Of course not.

  49. “@Jynn, yes! If you believe that tilt of the Earth’s axis affects the “severity of seasons” then what you learned in University is bullshit!”

    Don’t need to be a rocket scientist to get why a greater angle would cause warmer summers and colder winters. As to why it might cause ice ages:

    Yes I did go to wiki for this one, because I don’t remember the exact details, but here you go:

    ‘Axial tilt, the second of the three Milankovitch Cycles, is the inclination of the Earth’s axis in relation to its plane of orbit around the Sun. Oscillations in the degree of Earth’s axial tilt occur on a periodicity of 41,000 years from 21.5 to 24.5 degrees.

    Today the Earth’s axial tilt is about 23.5 degrees, which largely accounts for our seasons. Because of the periodic variations of this angle the severity of the Earth’s seasons changes. With less axial tilt the Sun’s solar radiation is more evenly distributed between winter and summer. However, less tilt also increases the difference in radiation receipts between the equatorial and polar regions.

    One hypothesis for Earth’s reaction to a smaller degree of axial tilt is that it would promote the growth of ice sheets. This response would be due to a warmer winter, in which warmer air would be able to hold more moisture, and subsequently produce a greater amount of snowfall. In addition, summer temperatures would be cooler, resulting in less melting of the winter’s accumulation. At present, axial tilt is in the middle of its range.’

    Your arrogance and insults are really not appreciated in what could be a sensible debate.

  50. “Your arrogance and insults are really not appreciated in what could be a sensible debate.”

    One could easily say the same about your posts. I am nothing, however, if not a reasonable man and I will take you up on the debate if you’re interested. No arrogance or insults whatsoever.


  51. Admittedly a few of my comments have been written while my blood was up and my opening post was something of a veiled insult. I apologise for that.. Happy to start fresh as I do find this topic very interesting, with a guarantee of no insulting words. Hopefully Servant can do the same.

    To start I would suggest contesting the following regarding why ice core samples show temperature rise preceding CO2 rise, which gives rise to the false conclusion that CO2 can’t be the thing that causes global warming:

    ““When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth’s orbit. The warming causes the oceans to release CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise. Overall, about 90% of the global warming occurs after the CO2 increase.”

    Servant has already responded to this by saying that the earth’s orbit does not change to which I would respond that he’s going to need to disprove the Milankovitch orbital cycle theory which states:

    “Eccentricity is, simply, the shape of the Earth’s orbit around the Sun. This constantly fluctuating, orbital shape ranges between more and less elliptical (0 to 5% ellipticity) on a cycle of about 100,000 years. These oscillations, from more elliptic to less elliptic, are of prime importance to glaciation in that it alters the distance from the Earth to the Sun, thus changing the distance the Sun’s short wave radiation must travel to reach Earth, subsequently reducing or increasing the amount of radiation received at the Earth’s surface in different seasons.”

    Then there are other cycles (axial tilt and precession) which also affect climate but we can go into those later if need be.

  52. If we’re going to debate, we first have to establish positions-

    What’s your position regarding AGW?

    Here’s mine-

    The climate on Earth is in a constant state of flux. There is no constant “correct” climate. There are a wide variety of factors that affect climate, all of them natural. Attempting to alter climate to either preserve or restore a “perfect” climate are at best arrogant and directly contradict the premise- that mankind is having an affect on climate, i.e. therefore we should further attempt to alter it to fit our concept of “proper” or “perfect”- fill in whatever word best suits.

  53. (Chuckle.)

    This started as a thread about the financial system. Notice where it went?

    For what little it’s worth, please consider noting that people now are positively lining up to yell at each other (on line.) If stocks and (especially) bonds begin to tank in earnest, look for them to line up and at first yell at each other in person, then attack each other physically.

    This is normal behavior in a bear market in SOCIAL MOOD.

    It is irresistible, and you and I are being pulled by strings inside our minds operating at levels far below the conscious.

    The parts of our brains involved in this are the same ones that run phobias and reflex actions (like jumping when a box of snakes lands in your lap.) It’s not rational and you won’t even realize it’s pulling your strings unless you pay very close attention to your actions and notice when you find yourself rationalizing what otherwise is a pretty irrational or even foolish action you took.

    This is the system that drives people to by stocks (land, bonds, etc.) after they’ve been rising for a long time and “everyone” knows they’re going higher (usually near a top) and the system that causes people to panic-sell right at lows, just before the ensuing rally.

    Get used to being angry. You’re going to find yourself marinating in anger for a while, I suspect.

  54. @Hardscrabble,

    You nailed it.

    Look at (what amounts to) political action everywhere. It all falls into two categories:
    1. Move the world toward Utopia.
    2. Stop change.
    (I leave off #3, which is really the rule: Privatize profit, socialize costs.)

    Is today’s “climate” optimal? That question is never asked, is it?

    Is a static climate possible? That question also is never asked.

    FWIW, all living systems (and systems made up of living things) are dynamic. Only dead things are static. So when you see someone try to tell you to support some notion that is synonymous with stasis, you know they’re too short for the ride.

    1. by Karl Denninger

      So About That Bull(Crap) Market

      Everyone is looking for an excuse.

      North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb (suuuure they did; there was clearly something detonated, and it was almost-certainly atomic as the seismic signature is quite-unique, but it sure wasn’t big enough to be an H-bomb as we think of them.)

      China. Uh huh. Shanghai was up 2% last night.


      Keep trying, folks.

      Or you could just deal with reality. You know, the reality that the last 30 years of bond rate environment, that is, ever-lower rates that allowed and in fact encouraged people to “borrow from tomorrow” and increase leverage, thereby presenting a false picture of economic output and the sustainability thereof, has ended.

      Of course there’s a problem with that reality.

      It materially increases the risk that the figures in the ticker tape on the top of this blog will be seen, and perhaps seen quite a bit sooner than you think.

  55. “The climate on Earth is in a constant state of flux. There is no constant “correct” climate. There are a wide variety of factors that affect climate, all of them natural.
    Attempting to alter climate to either preserve or restore a “perfect” climate are at best arrogant and directly contradict the premise- that mankind is having an affect on climate, i.e. therefore we should further attempt to alter it to fit our concept of “proper” or “perfect”- fill in whatever word best suits.”

    I completely agree Hardscrabble. However I would say there is a big difference between altering the climate for our needs and discontinuing to fuck it up. As far as I’m aware there aren’t any serious plans to try alter the climate eg. some silly plans like pumping sulphur dioxide to counteract CO2, space shields etc. I think this debate is more about whether AGW is real or not.

    Here’s my position:

    Climate has been in a constant state of flux and is one of the main reasons for the rise and fall of animal / plant species. Natural climate change can be slow or in some cases, very rapid due to positive feedback loops. The evidence suggests that AGW which is due to a rapid increase of CO2 over the last century will override any natural climate change, possibly triggering huge positive feedback loops (eg: methane in the arctic), and causing massive climatic disasters in the coming century leading to a huge reduction in the human species through war, disease and famine.

  56. Denninger is right. It’s all about the bond market.

    A tiny increase in rates DESTROYS vast wealth.

    When the bond market was small, like a pond, and rates rose, it was like 1 mm of water evaporated off the pond. Not much water disappeared.

    With the bond market now the size of the Pacific Ocean, the same small increase in rates, like a 1mm evaporation, reduces the total amount of water by millions of cubic feet.




    Everyone still thinks the long end of the curve matters, but in reality the USA has shifted vast amounts of its borrowing to very short-term debt. This means that small changes in the short end of the curve have very large effects on the capital value of that debt.

    As the 3 month T-bill and 1 year note rise in rate, some people are seeing their accounts DESTROYED, especially the large players who often own that debt on very high leverage.

    There are lots of trains out these nights, all running without lights. It’s always the one you don’t see that gets you.

  57. Jynn, your position (and the position of all people on that side of this debate) truly underestimates the buffering capacity of the Earth.

    This planet has existed under conditions that have been between and upper and lower boundary for time out of mind. I submit that natural inputs to the climate of the Earth have varied by factors far greater than anything Man has produced, over millions of years.

    Yet conditions did not enter “feedback loops.” Feedback loops do not exist in buffered systems.

    There are many “greenhouse” gasses. There are many inputs. The climate is the very definition of a complex system.

    If no computer model can successfully predict the value of stocks (in a less complex “complex system”) a week out, why on Earth would you posit that any model of any sort could possibly have predictive value regarding the temperature of any part or the whole of Earth?

    Scaling UP such things makes them worse, does it not?

  58. ONEMORECUP says: Jynn, they ain’t listening. Why engage? There’s plenty of science out there, over 30 years worth in a dozen different disciplines, but these folks are choosing to ignore it or throw in with the deniers.
    NOAA and the IPCC have been caught red-handed manipulating and falsifying climate data. Therefore you cannot believe ANY of their data or their hypotheses.

    When lied to by “scientists” how can you take anything else they say seriously? ‘Nuf said.

  59. Just want to add that it’s so good to see DC Sunsets posting more frequently. He’s one of the smartest posters here, and a pretty darn good novelists (“Revolutionary Language”).

    Drud, your reply to Jynn @1:13 (and subsequent ones) were terrific.

    HSF, your common-sense responses are also worth gold.

    This is why I give donations to this website–masterful comments by wise folks. Worth every penny!

  60. Just in between chores, gotta run but wanted to respond-

    “AGW which is due to a rapid increase of CO2 over the last century will override any natural climate change…”

    Is it your contention that human beings aren’t part of nature?

  61. @IS, traditional solar system depictions are of a flat plane with all the planets on the same plane. What do you make of the helical/vortex model of our solar system as it travels through space? I’d like your thoughts on this theory.

  62. Jynn says: I completely agree Hardscrabble. However I would say there is a big difference between altering the climate for our needs and discontinuing to fuck it up. As far as I’m aware there aren’t any serious plans to try alter the climate eg. some silly plans like pumping sulphur dioxide to counteract CO2, space shields etc
    That statement says volumes of how illiterate you are on this subject. Ever heard of Solar Radiation Management? Google it and see how chemtrails are being used in a futile attempt to mitigate “global warming”.

  63. ‘That statement says volumes of how illiterate you are on this subject. Ever heard of Solar Radiation Management? Google it and see how chemtrails are being used in a futile attempt to mitigate “global warming”.’

    @Rise-up : Just because I don’t know anything about chemtrails, doesn’t make me illiterate on AGW. Two very different subjects.

    @HardSCrabble, aren’t we getting into semantics here? To be more precise then: ‘“AGW which is due to a rapid increase of CO2 from human emissions over the last century will override any climate change caused by earths natural orbital cycles…”

  64. Jynn says: @Rise-up : Just because I don’t know anything about chemtrails, doesn’t make me illiterate on AGW. Two very different subjects.
    Totally wrong! The 2 subjects ARE linked. SRM is a proposed mitigation strategy to so called “AGW”.
    You have a steep learning curve ahead of you.

  65. @ DC Sunsets ,, Thank you for your thought full answer. I ponder this constantly , and your right ,skills , out of debt etc are very much pre cursers for surviving the almost mathematically impossible to avoid fiat currency credit collapse . Will governments ,under the control of POCB’s revalue to whatever suits their interests? Absolutely !.
    Preparing for eventualities keeps me and family fed etc. It will take me a day or so but I will
    violate my particular OP SEC and get a burn phone , and post it here , I work for a very large company , and you might be surprised at the particulars that are very possibly right up your area of expertise DC. With the number will be times to contact , simply because I work a varying schedule .
    If I am being presumptious , shit I cant spell lol , then tell me to fuck off lol .
    I am close to retirement sorta. bout 10 years.
    401k with 117 % company match , no vesting period.
    Decent health care insurance .
    Pension funded by company @ 4% of whatever your total salary, bonus income is for year .
    Vacations.based on tenure , low on the starting side , better as time goes by .
    Mostly , paid holidays off , with 2 additional floating holidays.
    Short term , and long term disability based on tenure.
    Other benefits ,depending on position in company . For example company car , credit card , things of that nature .
    Yearly performance reviews. I have never missed a raise actually and it seems reasonable
    I cannot complain actually about my work environment .
    2nd largest company of its type in the U.S.
    I am not a recruiter , except in the most oblique way . I do hire various management staff tho for my location .
    50/50 chance they need someone in your location . They are global in a limited way , tho unsure of that scope except for it is a global market we are in and a very common name .
    Post burn phone number @ 12pm est tomorrow if I can get it to work lol

    Please be considerate of my time constrictions on the burn phone, altho for a few I will understand if im called and um cussed out lol

    Just a cook ))

  66. @Jynn, I really don’t understand your argument. Milankovitch cycles apply to Ice Ages not global warming and certainly not AGW. These cycles occur over tens of thousands of years and longer. Mankind’s increased output of Co2 has only been in the last 200 years or so. My argument that Earth’s orbit does not change was with respect to it being the cause of the current fad of global warming. Changes in Earth’s inclination to the plane of the solar system and variations in the eccentricity of its elliptical orbit happen on vastly different time scales and do not play a part in AGW. Your argument makes no sense.

    you said:
    “Your arrogance and insults are really not appreciated in what could be a sensible debate.”

    Apparently you are not familiar with The Burning Platform. Stick around though, you’re gonna do fine here! I mean that. Most global warming shills run for the exits when challenged.

  67. hardscrabble farmer says:
    “If we’re going to debate, we first have to establish positions-

    What’s your position regarding AGW?

    In a nutshell, it’s bullshit. Like you said, our climate changes continuously and has done so for 4.5 billion years. The rise of the current fad of global warming is a ginned up excuse to exert more and more control over humans primarily in the west by restricting and taxing our activities. The science backing it up is severely flawed by admission of the IPCC itself. When you cherry pick unassailable temperature data the models show a slight decrease in global temps over the the period in question. Any responsible scientist would immediately retract their conclusions once their data was found to be flawed regardless of discipline. That is not happening and the massive involvement of western governments is highly suspicious.

  68. I should add that when I was in grade school the alarmist fad at the time was in favor of an imminent ice age that would find the northern half of the USA uninhabitable before the end of my lifetime.

    Governments always need a new boogeyman to extract more wealth from the sheep. The war on drugs, war on poverty, no child left behind, war on terrorism………..all failures are prime examples of why the government should never be trusted to “solve” any of our problems.

    The very fact that TPTB changed the name of this crisis from global warming to climate change is very telling. It’s hard to argue with something that is universally acknowledged.

  69. @Jynn, are you aware that large earthquakes like the Christmas quake in the Indian Ocean and the more recent Fukushima have significant effects on the tilt of Earth’s axis? Those events are tiny compared to say a large meteor impact like the one that killed the dinosaurs. I’d bet that an event like that has far more influence on our tilt than Milankovitch Cycles.

  70. @Jynn, I’m off to work but I wonder if the admission by the IPCC that the data used to create the model of global of global warming was massaged and manipulated in support of their theory affects your belief in it? If so, how?

    My opinion follows the old adage of “garbage in, garbage out”. Their model is fatally flawed but that is almost universally ignored by AGW adherents. Why is that?

  71. there is no global warming/there is a tax scheme,

    there is tremendous pollution/but the big corps.

    continue to throw all garbage into the water or

    left at the roadside.

    The sky, and water and food are being filled with poison…

    and the PTB have people arguing about global warming.

    What a joke.

  72. Re: helical vortex solar system.

    If the observable red shift is in fact evidence of a “big bang” type event, then t would have to be true. Nothing in the Universe is stationary, but rather moving outwards from the origin of the Universe itself.

    If something is moving- like a star- and it has planets orbiting, they would have to be following a vortex.

    Unless the laws of physics do not apply.

  73. “Unless the laws of physics do not apply” – HSF

    May I make an addendum?

    “Unless the understood laws of physics do not apply.”

    IMO we have a VERY limited understanding of the very very large and the very very small and no friggin’ clue how the very very small sums to the very very large. This is the reason physicists have been searching for a Grand Unified Theory for almost a century. Even General Relativity shows massive holes. It explains planetary motion quite well, but breaks down when applied to Galaxies and Clusters.

    The biggest issue I see with Cosmology in general is what I call “Six Blind Men and the Elephant” Syndrome. We have only one perspective from which to view celestial mechanics and have only been doing so for the very tiniest window in time (even if you want to go back to the Egyptians). The most important thing to consider about the Six Blind Men is that none of them are really wrong–it’s just none of them have the whole picture.

    As far as the helical model of the solar system, I had not heard of it before this thread and I didn’t watch the video. I do understand Kepler’s laws of planetary motion and they explain the Solar System quite well (except for Mercury–which is explained nicely by General Relativity).

  74. Stock market:
    Monthly trend is (astonishingly) still up, but that could change within a few weeks.
    Weekly trend is now down.
    Daily trend is now clearly down.

    For this to change, the SPX would have to rally up well past 2020, over 70 points higher.

    Can this happen? Of course. Weekly Williams%R is nearing a place where rallies often occur, and a hard down close today will cement the daily Williams%R in “tomorrow is either a collapse or an upside reversal day.” Short-killers are what I call the latter (because I’ve been killed in them.)

    Until it does rally past about 2020, however, the path of least resistance is lower.

  75. If the market keeps going down in hard slides and overlapping rallies, pretty soon there will be a very long void where there is no chart support.

    For 20 years I’ve expected the hydrogen to come out of this Hindenburg. What I expect is that someone who “bought and held” 20 years ago to see every dime he’s made these last 20 years disappear….and then some.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

  76. HI-larious!

    Right on cue, as markets tank, out come the “Investors: Don’t Panic” stories.

    Stock analysts all maintained “Buy” ratings on Enron while it melted down 95%.

    And lest we forget, Fannie Mae’s public offering dropped 95%….and then dropped ANOTHER 95% from there.

    Yes, Virgina, there is Mr. Bear. He’s been hibernating for a very, very long time (since 1982, frankly) and when he emerges from his den he’s going to be very, very hungry. The SPX is now down 2.5% on the day.

    If it closes down here in half an hour then either tomorrow is straight down all day long or it’s an upside reversal pointing prices back toward the 2000 level.

    I’m counting on Door #2 because I bailed out of 3/5th of my short position late yesterday due to some sketch technicals.

    Oh well, I’m not LOSING money, at least.

  77. IS, it’s the same thing with HIV/AIDS.

    The inventor of PCR (the means for HIV testing) has stated that it’s just detecting background stuff.

    Back when AIDS was first reported, a signature disease within the constellation was Kaposi’s Sarcoma.

    When “HIV testing” started to roll out, too few people with Kaposi’s Sarcoma produced positive results….so the CDC quietly removed Kaposi’s Sarcoma from the list of AIDS diseases.

    Massaging data is a hallmark of junk science.

  78. Remember 10 years ago when “everyone” in Africa was presumed HIV positive and the continent was predicted to be a ghost town in no time?

    A decade later population counters are telling us Africa’s in the midst of a fertility boom and its population will quadruple in a few decades.

    All so-called science that grabs headlines is junk. If you begin with that premise you’ll rarely go wrong.

    Remember “cold fusion?” Announced by a couple of CHEMISTS?

    Theoretical physicist Alan Cromer showed how, if their data had been correct, they all would have been killed by the resulting radiation. He also showed that every physicist on the planet new the story was hokum.

    Science in the news is almost always propaganda. Real science reveals the lies of the ruling paradigm and is considered BLASPHEMY. Look at what happened to James Watson or Peter Duesberg.

  79. HSF, Every star we see in the night sky is part pf the Milky Way galaxy. These stars orbit the center of our galaxy while the galaxy itself moves outward from the point of the Big Bang.

    If solar systems were in fact moving in a helical manner following their central star/s it should be directly observable but that is not what we see. If planets in a solar system were trailing their parent star we would not have solar eclipses. The heliocentric model matches the observations not only for our solar system but for all other so far observed.

    The motion of galaxies is redshifted with respect to the origin of the universe but solar systems within galaxies move according to the angular momentum imparted to them during their formation within the galaxy. Some stars even gain enough angular momentum to escape their parent galaxy and are known as intergalactic wanderers.

  80. Is the current market malaise in China smoke and mirrors, allowing them to unwind US forex reserves ahead of the big show in US T-bills?
    If so, who will buy at this level, and for how long?
    Or another way, did the west pull the plug on the east, or is the east pulling the plug on the west? Or has a third pulled THE plug?


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.