Steve Bull's Blog, page 1184
February 22, 2018
The Anthropocene’s Birthday, or the Birth-Year of Human-Accelerated Climate Change
Scientists have found a major spike in the amount of Carbon-14 within the tree rings of “The Loneliest Tree In The World,” which ring corresponds to October-December 1965.
This tree is a Sitka Spruce, a species from the American Northwest (and into Canada) that was planted on Campbell Island in 1901 (or 1905), which island is in the Southern Ocean about 400 miles south of the southern tip of New Zealand.
There are no other trees on Campbell Island, just low scrubs. Since the next landmass south of Campbell Island is Antarctica, this tree is the furthest one south on Earth (so far as I can tell). The next closest tree is north about 170 miles, on another small island south of New Zealand.
The significance of this finding is that geologists now know that the start of the Anthropocene – which is the geological period when GLOBAL (not just local) climate is clearly being influenced by human activity and at an accelerating rate – began in 1965.
The Carbon-14 marker is from the radioactive fallout from atmospheric nuclear bomb testing, which grew from 1945 and peaked in 1962, after which it stopped (except for a few isolated atmospheric tests since) in 1963 as a result of the Test Ban treaty of that year.
The accumulated radioactive fallout from the massive testing of the 1950s and early 1960s (with a huge amount in 1962) had finally spread out uniformly through the global atmosphere, and the Carbon-14 from that fallout was being infused into trees globally through the process of photosynthesis.
So, this spike in tree-ring Carbon-14 in 1965 is a GLOBAL marker of human activity on global climate, and thus is the birthday of human-induced/accelerated Climate Change.
Coring “the loneliest tree in the world”
February 21, 2018
UK Mass Digital Surveillance Regime Ruled Illegal
On 30 January, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act of 2014 (DRIPA), which made way for the Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 (IPA), did not restrict the access of confidential personal phone and web browsing records to investigations of serious crime. The IPA means that Internet service providers must now store details of everything we do online for twelve months and render it accessible to dozens of public bodies.
This data can be virtually everything, from browsing records to personal information on private citizens, to include but not limited to: search engine activity, every phone call to text message plus geographical location, private financial and credit repair services, personal correspondence, medical records, and data from banking, insurance, and investment services which is stored on computers and mobile telephones. This law obliges technology companies to hand over the data that they have about private citizens to intelligence agencies and it can force tech companies like Apple to remove encryption, ultimately weakening the security of their own products in total secrecy.
The ability of the government to spy on private citizens’ includes the encroachment upon the fundamental rights of privacy in financial matters, such that a “super-spy search engine” has become part of the arsenal that the Home Office is accused of hosting. What does surveillance mean in an era where financial information needs to be safeguarded and when economic interests such as crypto robots and cryptocurrencies could face government spying?
Let’s step back to 2004, when philosopher Giorgio Agamben refused to submit passport biodata in 2004 in the United States when he famously rescinded his appointment to lecture at New York University. Resisting the submission of fingerprints required to enter
the United States as a foreign visitor, Agamben’s actions then foreshadowed what he would later address in his 2013 Athens lecture:
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Meddling for Empire: the CIA Comes Clean
Photo by Christopher Michel | CC BY 2.0
“We’ve been doing this kind of thing [electoral meddling] since the CIA was created in 1947.”
Loch K. Johnson, New York Times, Feb 17, 2018
Electoral meddling has become the gruel of US politics for months, and more servings are being promised in the wake of the indictments against 16 Russians and Russian entities dished out Robert Mueller last week. Such actions can, when taken in isolation, seem sensible. Righteous indignation can be channelled appropriately, and given the suitable icing of exceptionalism.
One of the difficulties behind the podium stance of virtue taken by the US political establishment on Russian interference in the country’s electoral process is one of simple hypocrisy. In the game, and importantly theatre, of international relations, the shove, give, and take are all powerful incentives. Express outrage, by all means, but do so with a certain sentient awareness that you have been as culpable as your opponent of the same charge.
Idealism, however, is the magic mushroom that clouds such assessments. Filled with pride and a sense of purpose, individuals such as former CIA director James Woolsey are happy to first say that the CIA “probably” inserts its nose in the electoral affairs of other states, then justify it.
Friday’s encounter with Laura Ingraham of Fox News was sufficiently frank, if unsettling, in pulling down any pretence about the role of US power and its self-justified assertiveness in the electoral processes of other states. “Have we ever tried to meddle in other countries’ elections?” posed Ingraham. “Oh, probably,” came the humoured response, “but it was for the good of the system in order to avoid communists taking over.”
Then came a few points of illustration: “For example, in Europe, in ’47, ’48, ’49, the Greeks and the Italians, we CIA…” Ingraham, at that point, charged in with an interruption, asking whether the US “did that anymore”. “We don’t mess around in other peoples’ elections, Jim?”
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
What is Optimal Monetary Policy, Anyway?
Ever since the important contributions of new classical economists Finn E. Kydland and Edward C. Prescott during the 1970s and 80s, modern macroeconomics seeks optimal rules for monetary policy. Indeed, Milton Friedman had previously emphasized the importance of a binding rule for monetary policy. He recommended a constant but moderate expansion of the money stock over time as well as the abolition of fractional reserve banking in order to improve the central bank’s control over the money stock. Neither of these two measures has ever been implemented over an extended period of time.
Creating Rules for Monetary Policy
Many modern macroeconomists have come to reject the idea of a constant growth rule in favor of a more complex rule that incorporates feedback effects from other macroeconomic aggregates. According to their rationale, political discretion in the form of unexpected accelerations of the money growth rate may lead to short-term benefits. Yet, the latter would come at long-term costs of either permanently too high price inflation or a consecutive readjustment to lower money growth rates that goes hand in hand with real economic losses in output and employment. This is what economists would refer to as the sacrifice ratio. Optimal monetary policy thus requires abstention from reaping some of the potential short-term benefits for the sake of long-term financial and economic stability.
The most famous monetary policy rules that have been deemed optimal are named after John B. Taylor. According to such Taylor rules the central rate of interest should be set in response to changes of actual price inflation, the natural rate of interest, as well as the output gap. There is one obvious practical problem, namely, that the output gap and the natural rate of interest are non-observable theoretical concepts that have to be estimated or replaced by more or less arbitrary empirical proxies.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Tomgram: Danny Sjursen, Buttering Up the Pentagon
Recently, the Pentagon’s top Asia official, Randall Schriver, told senators that the Afghan war would cost this country’s taxpayers $45 billion in 2018, including $5 billion for the Afghan security forces, $13 billion for U.S. forces in that country, and $780 million in economic aid. How the other $26 billion would be spent is unclear and, given the Pentagon’s record in these years, Schriver’s estimate could prove a low-ball figure. All in all, it’s just another year in this country’s endless war there. Still, if Schriver is on the mark, in Afghanistan alone the American taxpayer will spend more than a fifth of the $200 billion the Trump administration is urging Congress to put up for the rebuilding of America’s crumblinginfrastructure. (The estimated cost of the full war on terror in President Trump’s proposed 2018 budget, according to the Costs of War Project, is approximately… yep, you guessed it: $200 billion.) And, of course, all of that is next to nothing when compared to the $5.6 trillionthe Costs of War Project estimates the war on terror has already cost us (with certain future expenses added in).
Under the circumstances, isn’t it remarkable that the government has sent so many taxpayer dollars tumbling down the rabbit hole of its failed wars and the “reconstruction” scams in Afghanistan and Iraq that once passed for “nation-building”? (By 2014, the U.S. had already sunk more money into “reconstructing” Afghanistan than it had once put into the Marshall Plan to rebuild all of Western Europe — and compare the results of each of those investments!) More remarkable still, for all the bitter political disputes in these years about how government money should be spent, there has never been real disagreement here, no less significant protest, over the decision to put such staggering sums into America’s wars.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
New Fed Chairman Will Trigger A Historic Stock Market Crash In 2018
Ever since the credit and equities crash of 2008, Americans have been bombarded relentlessly with the narrative that our economy is “in recovery”. For some people, simply hearing this ad nauseam is enough to stave off any concerns they may have for the economy. For some of us, however, it’s just not satisfactory. We need concrete data that actually supports the notion, and for years, we have seen none.
In fact, we have heard from officials at the Federal Reserve that the exact opposite is true. They have admitted that the so-called recovery has been fiat driven, and that there is a danger that when the Fed finally stops artificially propping up the economy with constant stimulus and near zero interest rates, the whole farce might come tumbling down.
For example, Richard Fisher, former head of the Dallas Federal Reserve, admitted a few years ago that the U.S. central bank has made its business the manipulation of the stock market to the upside:
What the Fed did — and I was part of that group — is we front-loaded a tremendous market rally, starting in 2009. It’s sort of what I call the “reverse Whimpy factor” — give me two hamburgers today for one tomorrow.
I’m not surprised that almost every index you can look at … was down significantly.
Fisher went on to hint at the impending danger (though his predicted drop is overly conservative in my view), saying: “I was warning my colleagues, don’t go wobbly if we have a 10-20% correction at some point…. Everybody you talk to … has been warning that these markets are heavily priced.”
One might claim that this is simply one Fed member’s point of view. But it was recently revealed that in 2012, Jerome Powell made the same point in a Fed meeting, the minutes of which have only just now been released:
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Swedish Authorities Fear “Negative Spiral” As Society Goes Cashless ‘Too Fast’
In 1660, Sweden’s Riksbank was the first central bank in the world to issue paper currency.
In 2016, Sweden began to accelerate its transition from cash to digital currency.
At the time, Deputy Riksbank Governor Cecilia Skingsley warned:
“We need to do the homework because it’s not an option for the public sector to stay on the sidelines and see the private sector cut off access to central bank money for individuals.”
A year later, in 2017, cash in circulation was plummeting and establishment economists celebrated the battle in the war on cash.
Additionally, Riksbank was actively looking toward cryptocurrencies as potential government-backed money.
But now, in 2018, Swedish officials are worried that too much (or too little in this case) is a bad thing warning:
“If this development with cash disappearing happens too fast, it can be difficult to maintain the infrastructure” for handling cash.
As Bloomberg reports, Sweden is widely regarded as the most cashless society on the planet. Most of the country’s bank branches have stopped handling cash; many shops, museums and restaurants now only accept plastic or mobile payments.
But there’s a downside, since many people, in particular the elderly, don’t have access to the digital society.
“No cash accepted” signs are becoming an increasingly common sight in shops and eateries across Sweden as payments go digital and mobile.
Last year, the amount of cash in circulation in Sweden dropped to the lowest level since 1990 and is more than 40 percent below its 2007 peak. The declines in 2016 and 2017 were the biggest on record.
But the pace at which cash is vanishing has authorities worried.
“One may get into a negative spiral which can threaten the cash infrastructure,” Mats Dillen, the head of the parliamentary review, said.
“It’s those types of issues we are looking more closely at.”
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
February 20, 2018
62 Edible Wild Plants That You Didn’t Know You Can Eat
62 Edible Wild Plants That You Didn’t Know You Can Eat
You’re in the woods with some friends and realise neither of you packed enough food, what’s your first instinct? I certainly wouldn’t panic and neither should you. You are probably armed with tools in your backpack. Combine that with the Earth vast variety of natural foods; you should have little problem in getting nourishment. What then are those food that aren’t only found in restaurants or grocery stores?
This variety of foods include; wild berries, edible plants and even seeds! Sounds questionable? No need to worry as these wild edible plants, berries and seeds, are totally safe for consumption as long as you are certain of their identity when collecting.
If you are at any point unsure of the plant, you can perform the Universal Edibility Test. But! If you not one hundred percent sure of the plant that you are identifying, I would advise against consuming it.
Table Of Content
1. Fireweed
2. Dandelion
3. Chickweed
4. Curly Dock
5. Asparagus
6. Chicory
7. Wood Sorrel
8. Bull Thistle
9. Alfalfa
10. Broadleaf Plantain
11. Creeping Charlie
12. Forget Me Not
13. Garlic Mustard
14. Wild Black Cherry
15. Harebell
16. Elderberry
17. Field Pennycress
18. Coneflower
19. Kudzu
20. Meadowsweet
21. Mallow
22. Peppergrass
23. Pineapple Weed
24. Pickerelweed
25. Mullein
26. Red Clover
27. Partridgeberry
28. Sheep Sorrel
29. Shepherd’s Purse
30. Sunflower
31. Spring Beauty
32. Tea Plant
33. Toothwort
34. Teasel
35. Wild Grape Vine
36. Wild Bee Balm
37. Vervain Mallow
38. Prickly Pear Cactus
39. Herb Robert
40. Mayapple
41. Joe Pye Weed
42. Knapweed
43. Wild Leek
44. Cleavers
45. Cattail
46. Blue Vervain
47. Common Yarrow
48. Common Sow Thistle
49. Coltsfoot
50. Fern Leaf Yarrow
51. Henbit
52. Crimson Clover
53. Evening Primrose
54. Downy Yellow Violet
55. Daisy Fleabane
56. Japanese Knotweed
57. Milk Thistle
58. Lambs Quarters
59. Queen Anne’s Lace
60. Purple Deadnettle
61. New England Aster
62. Supplejack Vine
Conclusion
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
30+ Tips for Coping Without Running Water
Every prepper worth their salt stores water and lots of it. Not only that, they store one, two, three or more ways to purify water. That is all well and good because you never know when a disaster or other disruptive event may occur and those water resources will be called upon for drinking, cleaning, hygiene, and sanitation purposes.
Recently, my number came up and I was the one without water during a short term, personal water apocalypse. Now really, that may be a bit dramatic because I was simply without running water. This was caused by a break in the line from the water main at the street to my home. All told, I was without running water for 12 days.
SaveTo be honest, I was quite relaxed about the ordeal. After all, I had cases of bottled water for drinking, a 55 gallon water barrel holding purified water, a source of raw, unfiltered water from a gravity pump right outside my house, and of course, my Berkey, LifeStraw Family, SolarBag, and pool shock for water purification.
SaveStill, being without running water brought up issues I had not considered. Albeit water-ready, the reality of not being able to turn on the tap and have fresh, and especially hot, water was a new experience.
Today I share tips for coping without running water so that you can be better prepared if something similar happens to you.
Contents [show]
16 Tips [UPDATE: Now 31 Tips] for Coping Without Water
1. Fill the bathtub
With advance notice of a water shutoff, fill the bathtub and as many spare jugs and buckets as you can round up. In addition, fill the Berkey, if you have one and all of your sinks.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Old Age and Societal Decline
People grow old and die. Civilizations eventually fail. For centuries amateur philosophers have used the former as a metaphor for the latter, leading to a few useful insights and just as many misleading generalizations. The comparison becomes more immediately interesting as our own civilization stumbles blindly toward collapse. While not the cheeriest of subjects, it’s worth exploring.
A metaphor is not an explanation.
First, it’s important to point out that serious contemporary researchers studying the phenomenon of societal collapse generally find little or no explanatory value in the metaphorical link with individual human mortality.
The reasons for individual decline and death have to do with genetics, disease, nutrition, and personal history (including accidents and habits such as smoking). We are all genetically programmed to age and die, though lifespans differ greatly.
Reasons for societal decline appear to have little or nothing to do with genetics. Some complex societies have failed due to invasion by foreign marauders (and sometimes the diseases they brought); others have succumbed to resource depletion, unforeseeable natural catastrophe, or class conflict. Anthropologist Joseph Tainter proposed what is perhaps the best general theory of collapse in his 1988 book The Collapse of Complex Societies, which argued that the development of societal complexity is a problem-solving strategy that’s subject to diminishing marginal returns. Once a civilization’s return on investment in complexity goes negative, that civilization becomes vulnerable to stresses of all sorts that it previously could have withstood.
There is a superficial similarity between individual aging, on one hand, and societal vulnerability once returns on investments in complexity have gone negative, on the other. In both cases, what would otherwise be survivable becomes deadly—whether it’s a fall on an uneven sidewalk or a barbarian invasion. But this similarity doesn’t provide explanatory value in either case. No physician or historian will be able to do her job better by use of the metaphor.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
