Telegraph Fights Global IQ with Reason-Negative Whale Faeces

I mean, is someone actually PAID to write this? The article might actually refer to some sensible research, but the author of this article is so clueless or hurried that they cannot see that they have left out important facts that make the selected assertions illogical.

Bear with me as I grind through the article and at the end see how the article comes across like horse (or Whale) manure, yet the research may, in fact, not be.

Sperm whales fight global warming with carbon-neutral faeces

Southern Ocean sperm whales have emerged as an unexpected ally in the fight against global warming, removing the equivalent carbon emissions from 40,000 cars each year thanks to their faeces, a study has found.

Oh, has it. Well, lets see, shall we, children?...

The cetaceans have been previously fingered as climate culprits because they breathe out carbon dioxide (CO2), the most common greenhouse gas.

But this is only a part of the picture, according to the paper, published in the British journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

"climate culprits"? Whales? Has it occurred to anyone that all animals breathe out CO2? Even AGW/CACC supporters? (Well, they are worse because of the vast quantities of CH4, but I digress...). The fact that people are so twisted to assert that any life form is a "climate culprit" just because they breathe really should tell you the mentality of some people.

Australian biologists estimated that the estimated 12,000 sperm whales in the Southern Ocean each defecate around 50 tonnes of iron into the sea every year after digesting the fish and squid they hunt.

That is iron from the fish and squid that swim around them, no? Yes? Ok.

The iron is then eaten by phytoplankton - marine plants that live near the ocean surface and suck up CO2 from the atmosphere through photosynthesis.

Yum. Ok, keep going...

As a result of the fertilisation, the whales remove 400,000 tonnes of carbon each year, twice as much as the 200,000 tonnes of CO2 that they contribute through respiration.

That is like saying the paper industry "removes" x tonnes of CO2. Still, I am sure this is going to make sense later.

The whales' faeces are so effective because they are emitted in liquid form and close to the surface, before the mammals dive, said the paper.

Sperm Whales take a dump before going to work. I like them already.

Industrialised whaling not only gravely threatened Southern Ocean sperm whales, it also damaged a major carbon "sink," the scientific term for something that removes more greenhouse gases than it produces, it added.

Before industrial whaling, the population of this species was about 10 times larger, which meant around two million tonnes of CO2 were removed annually, said the paper.

DING! Presumption. Just because there were 10x as many Sperm Whales does not mean that 10x as many phytoplankton shall bloom [1]. Still, let us carry on, even if the idea of a "sink" has not yet been properly explored.

The scientists suspect that because sperm whales cluster in specific areas of the Southern Ocean there is a clear link between food availability and cetacean faeces.

How can you "suspect a clear link"? Well, that "CO2 of 40,000 cars" is now only suspected. Onward.

This could explain the "krill paradox," they believe. Researchers have previously found that when balleen whales are killed, the amount of krill in that sea area declines, which thus affects the entire food chain.

Which is all very well but Sperm Whales are not baleen whales, they are toothed, like dolphins and orca. Have they measured the iron in baleen whale poo? This is not mentioned, but it should be.

The study is lead-authored by Trish Lavery of the School of Biological Sciences at Flinders University in Adelaide.

If I were Trish, I'd be crying into my salad after seeing how all her work has been butchered by this woeful rendition.

The article is disjointed, non-sequitur and flimsy in the extreme. It tells us very little and what it does doesn't make much sense unless you are happy just to absorb baseless soundbites for later regurgitation. Near the surface. With plenty of iron.

What is being said here is that Sperm Whales eat fish and squid in the southern ocean, and out comes iron. What it seems to hint is that Sperm Whales are natural born alchemists or have a supernova in their guts, able to create an element, iron - Fe, the most stable element in the universe - from base things like fish and squid. It speaks as if the iron was not there before. Of course the iron was in the fish and squid. What it also does not mention is why Sperm Whales eating them is any different from other animals eating them or of the fish dying from natural causes and, most importantly, where did the iron in those fish and squid come from?

What is also overlooked is the fate of all that phytoplankton. What does it do, live forever? No, it gets either eaten by krill fish and squid or...drum roll...sinks to the bottom, also like some dead fish and squid.

The article here really should be mentioning the whole lifecycle. Phytoplankton take in CO2. Many are eaten. Animals that eat them then give off the CO2. No "sink". Some phytoplankton and some of the animals further up the food chain fall to the bottom of the ocean and this is the CO2 "sink". Phytoplankton in themselves are NOT a CO2 "sink" in themselves, for if they are eaten then the majority of CO2 they originally took in is almost certainly exhaled by those animals.

To say that phytoplankton take in 400,000 tonnes of CO2 and thus it is a 400,000 tonne CO2 "sink" is complete and utter codswallop, I am afraid.

What COULD be happening is due to the fact that Sperm Whales contribute to keeping iron in the upper waters, phytoplankton can breed in greater numbers than would otherwise occur and by some sinking to the bottom and the sinking of some of the animals that feed on them, some CO2 is "sunk".

Small flaw in this too. The iron is in the phytoplankton and resultant food chain, so as quickly as it is CO2 sinking, so Fe is sinking too. The only way this works is if Sperm Whales or the food it feeds on is IMPORTING iron to the Southern Oceans from elsewhere to keep the levels up.

Maybe this is in the paper by Trish Lavery. I hope it is.

What we do not need is articles like the one I have linked to. It not only provides incomplete "science" by garbling a research paper into a string of meaningless non-sequitur statements, it also risks conditioning people to accepting such incompleteness and non-sequiturs as a norm and a quite acceptable way of "communication". The Fabians must love it. A "result" for them.

To me it just grates. I want to know WHY, to UNDERSTAND, to not just accept blindly. To LEARN, rather than just be TAUGHT.

Is that too much to ask?

[1] I would also bet that if that nasty Mankind discharged iron into the Southern Oceans at 10x the rate of Sperm Whales, the environmentalists would be up in arms talking about a phytoplankton bloom that would destabilise the delicate ecosphere.

Dan Hannan Skewers Gordon Brown at the EUdenrat

hat tip Guido.

Dan Hannan says it as he so often does in clear, logical, and precise terms and with surgical precision. His minutes at the microphone are beautifully crafted and constructed, building into a crescendo.

A bankrupt Prime Minister, pathologically incapable not just of admitting fault, but of running the country, has just been skewered. Farage gave Blair a wonderful bitch-slapping at the end of his 6-month presidency, and Dan has now exposed Gordon in assembly, stripping him of his fraudulently obtained colours in magnificent style.

Bravo, Dan. 10/10. In a word: Delicious.

p.s. Loved the gasps around the chamber as the rapier wit did its work. You can't say that! Will you step outside! Will you step outside!!!!

Northern Rock saved from winding down due to "Inadequate IT"

Via Finextra (login required).

The UK government was forced to rule out letting failed bank Northern Rock wind down because poor IT systems would have left depositors waiting for their money, risking another major run.

The revelation comes in a report by the National Audit Office (NAO) on the government's handling of the failed bank, which was nationalised in February 2008.

The report says that in September 2007 the Treasury considered stopping Northern Rock from taking deposits and writing new mortgages and beginning a process of winding down the company.

However "inadequate IT systems at Northern Rock meant that depositors would have had to wait for their money".

The firm operated a manual account closure process and estimated that it would have taken up to 10 to 12 weeks to repay depositors, with a likely error rate of 25%.

This would have risked another major run and potential hardship for those reliant on access to their funds, says the report, forcing the government to rule out an immediate wind-down on "practical grounds".

The report says work on updating the technology was then begun to enable quicker repayment of depositors if needed at a later stage.

Does the term "not fit for purpose" spring to your mind as well as mine? Because they had inadequate systems that suggests to me that Northern Rock should almost certainly have been wound down and the Directors, or at least the CIO, wound up in gaol for gross negligence equal to fraud.

Other companies are not given a reprieve because their incompetent Directors had admin systems and procedures so bad nobody knew who was owed what, so why should this happen for a bank? Why should Taxpayers pay and continue to pay because those running Northern Rock were incompetent? It does not encourage good behaviour elsewhere.

Far from it.

This, on top of the news that we, the Taxpayer, had to pay £80m in Consultancy fees over the Northern Rock problems because of Treasury spinelessness/incompetence/irresponsibility, while the bank continued to churn out "Together" mortgages offering 125pc LTV.

Yes, "together" - Together, Northern Rock and the Taxpayer are drifting up Brown Creek without a moral compass.

Lambeth Logic FAIL - the shape of things to come?

Today I came across the following via the Libertarian Party unofficial blog.

A woman in Nottingham who owns a Toyota car was given a ticket because a white van was seen parked in a bus lane* with the same registration.

Lambeth automatic revenue vampire was swung into action with the default to "pay up or else". The fact that the vehicle type did not match was ignored or never even checked up on.

When the owner protested their innocence , the council, instead of looking at the facts - the van was using cloned plates - asked the lady to PROVE her ID and ownership. Now, the true ownership was already known, for how else did she get the ticket? Once the fact that the vehicle was a van and thus NOT her Toyota, the need to involve the owner would seem superfluous. Asking someone to "prove"? Prove what?

Lets see what they said:

A spokesperson from Lambeth Council said: "We share Miss Keiller's frustration but it is important she sends us the requested documentation as proof as soon as possible so we can look to cancel the ticket."

This is just mindless application of bureaucratic protocol and procedure. It has no basis in logic or reason. The fact that Lambeth persists in this charade is absurd. 

I am intrigued as to the reasons why.

Is it because the Council functionaries are ignorant and are just following a bad protocol?

Is it because the Council functionaries might have an idea if they bothered, but could not care less either way?

Is it because the Council functionaries cannot work out the unreason of all this and so dig in?

Is it because the Council functionaries know they are at fault but have decided that they must not be seen to back down?

Maybe they think they are right.

Considering the illogic one sees these days, I think it is the last option.

As the LPUK unofficial blog points out, the lady was asked to prove innocence, even when the evidence was clear. Now, if the clone was the same make, model and colour, that is another matter, but in this case, the demand as to proof of innocence is utterly unwarranted.

Just think of all the other ways you and I will get snagged as a Database State is built. Oyster Card cloned? Mobile Phone? Someone wearing the same clothes seen near a crime? Being in a pub at the same time as a dangerous subversive anti-authoritarian gang of cut-throats?

Who knows. Remember, these databases will not just be used to confirm facts or build evidence about known suspects, they will be used for fishing expeditions and trawled with a very big and destructive dragnet. Innocent people will be pulled in, left on the deck gasping for god-knows-how-long until such time as they might be thrown back. In what condition?

* far more dangerous than beating someone up in the street or intimidating passers by for months on end, you understand.

Channel 4 Whitewashes Quantative Easing

Maybe I misheard it, but C4 News, 7pm, 18th Feburary 2009, did not outline the actual impact of Quantative Easing, as in diluting the money in our pockets and bank accounts. It just said that the Bank of England will ask permission to buy Government debt "with cash". Even the idea of printing money was not nailed home as far as I could tell. Reporting FAIL.

It is as if you are a beer-maker and the Government pitches up at your warehouse in the dead of night with a truck of water and a truck of barrels. It waters down your beer and takes away barrels of beer for its own use. Because it gets first dibs on the barrels, those least diluted will be taken first. You wake up and count your barrels and all seems ok. When you come to sell your beer you find there is more in the marketplace and what you have is weaker, so the price you get is lower. Your beer is now less valuable and the State has beer - money - it never had. It is theft, pure and simple.

"I promise to pay the bearer"? What happened to that?

It is about time we had proper plurality in our currency - a fiat Sterling as now, a gold-backed Sovereign (not in note form to avoid fraud) and any number of currencies that private organisations wish to produce. This will keep the fiat currency and its controllers - the State - on their toes. Yes, it can be expanded if the economy expands, but as soon as it is being manipulated, people will leave it for Sovereign or Bank Money.

Gordon Brown: "A grand bargain"?

Gordon Brown is proposing a grand bargain...

“From the discussions I have had and am about to have... I think we are fashioning for the future a global deal, a grand bargain, where each continent accepts its responsibilities and its obligations to act to deal with what is a global problem that can only be solved with a global solution,”

Of course, this is more thinly veiled attempts to construct One World Government by the back door. You know, Communism. 

I have my own Grand Bargain for Gordon Brown: Resign now or risk swinging from a lamp post*.

Am I being a scaremonger over One World Government? Well, once you begin to impose global controls and regulations on financial markets, the ripples flow back into the Treasuries of each country. Sovereignty is lost. Such groups will grow. It is in their DNA. If they are no longer needed, will they shrink back? No. Will they continually explore ways to extend their remit? Yes. They are a bureaucracy. They will have budgets not directly accountable to the people. It is a recipe for total disaster, for the impoverishment and re-enslavement of Mankind.

Now, I do complain about the actions of individual Governments and our own in particular for not monitoring and managing the value of our currency, but that is a matter for the electorate to hold the Government to account, not for some supra-national entity to presume authority and step in. We must remember that we are dealing with a poisonous cocktail of Socialists, Marxists, Trots, Corporatists and the like, if the EU Commission is anything to go by, who think they know better how our lives must be run. Note the word "must". 

The Libertarian Party believes it has the least bad way to improve the lives and freedoms of people, but we only wish that people be given the opportunity to live their lives a certain way, no demands that people must behave, only that they must be personally responsible for theor own lives and decisions and not be dependent upon another without mutual, individual, non-coercive consent.

Lets see if the idea passes the LPUK Libertarian Test:Global Solution?

Test 1. FAIL - it is unaccountable, protects private interests and will almost certainly result in devaluation and thus theft of wealth and property.

Test 2. FAIL - Joseph and Mr Bean would find it useful

Test 3. FAIL - It is supra-national, a transfer of Sovereignty.

* Note that I do not condone summary justice, being a strong supporter of Rule of Law. The issue is that Gordon is playing with fire, risking the very cohesion of civilised society, for once the Genie is out of the bottle, all manner of chaos and destruction can occur far beyond the scope intended by many otherwise decent people driven to distraction.

Gordon Brown: "All Britain Needs is Confidence in Itself"

Well, oh damp trousered one, I have confidence in myself, but I certainly DO NOT have confidence in YOU, Gordon Brown, Town Clerk of Britain.

Oh, and as for your phone going off in Davos, that is what I describe as a Statesmanship FAIL.