Billion Dollar House?


Billion Dollar House

Billion Dollar House

.

.

.

This is the world’s first billion dollar home.  Yes, that’s $1,000,000,000 smackers.

Not the silly UK Billion which is really just a million.

That’s a pretty big chunk of change for a home sweet home.    I don’t mean to offend the designer or anything, but I think I might ask to trade this in for, say a  THOUSAND million dollar homes.    Think about it.   This, or you could have an average of about 8 great million dollar homes in every single country in the world.    Or you could live nicely and then give away nine-hundred-ninety-nine  ONE Million dollar homes to needy rich people.    OR, you could have a pretty decent 99,900,000 dollar home and a cool Tesla roadster and then pocket nine hundred million for the gas you won’t need to drive your electric car.

The Hockey Stick Controversy …


You are well advised to avoid the globally frustrating mistake of getting interested in the underpinnings of climate science as it relates to global warming, climate models, paleoclimate reconstructions, the IPCC, Al Gore, and the academy awards.

However if you fall into the trap of actually looking at the science you’ll be interested in an excellent lay summary of the hockey stick controversy by Bishop Hill. I wish he’d left out the perjorative stuff because I think he’s done a nice job of documenting some of the irregularities that seem to shape the modern debates among scientists, statisticians, and political forces.

Here’s a harder to read but perhaps more objective review of the Hockey Stick at Wikipedia.   This debate is important more from a political view than a scientific one as the graph is a key cornerstone for global warming activism even though it is NOT a cornerstone for the science, which to most experts clearly indicates human caused global warming is a problem.

Although warming is clear and human causes are likely, a reasoned review of the science hardly suggests catastrophe is looming.   This is the advanced debate which is only just beginning – given that we have warming caused by humans, how aggresssively should we work to stop it?   At what cost should we work to keep CO2 from rising?

I remain confused about how much problematic math and insider politics within the climate scientist community should affect our perception of global warming’s threat to the planet, but no reasonable observer can maintain that pristine science has shaped the current debate over global warming.    Spend an hour at RealClimate.org reading the defense of the film “An Inconvenient Truth” by several internationally prestigious climate scientists to see what I mean.

Ironically as the scientific debate becomes far more nuanced than it was even a few years ago, the *political debate* is effectively over.   The political/alarmist camp says that Global warming is destroying earth and we need to make drastic changes … yesterday … to avoid climate castastrophes of greater-than-biblical proportions.

Catastrophe isn’t looming, but it’s also true that we are damaging things possibly beyond repair.  That does not mean we should spend trillions trying to fix these problems while greater problems loom so large on earth, but it suggests we should do every cheap thing we can and find better ways to pull energy from our environment.

Beijing Olympic Village … 4 months ago…


Olympic Village … 4 months ago…

Originally uploaded by JoeDuck

The Beijing folks are such amazing capitalists that they were literally selling off the Olympic Village housing complex as luxury apartments in April – about four months before the Olympics!

The Olympic area is to form a new upscale residential area for Beijing, which has grown out many miles via concentric rings of development that began at the “center” of Beijing at Tiananmen Square.