It’s on old adage that it’s impolite to discuss money/politics/religion at a dinner party. That’s probably because most people don’t fully understand money/politics/religion, but that’s another story; I have a new one to add to the ‘gagging’ category: global warming…
Anyone who even hints at global warming even possibly being nonsense has rotten fruit thrown at them before they can say “SUV”. It’s worrisome that I should hesitate to mention it myself even right here in ‘controversy H.Q.’, and this is the very heart of the problem because it’s antiscientific, not to mention anti-Constitutional!
Science is about the exact opposite to what’s happening in this arena today; science is about OPEN-MINDEDNESS, objective analysis AND continually re-evaluating theories. Most importantly, true science isn’t afraid to admit to being wrong if new conflicting data disproves the status quo.
FACT: global warming is a scientific theory.
Now, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong, but it does mean that we must find concrete evidence and continue to evaluate it. We also should not suppress any data if we’re being truly scientific. I think anyone arguing against global warming is misinterpreted as saying, “I couldn’t give a crap about our planet”. In most cases, that isn’t what is being said though; what’s being said is, “Okay, prove it.”
You see, the onus is on the one making the claims that something exists to prove their point, not the one who wants convincing (I could go off at a religious tangent here).
And that means that, as in a court room, it should be proven BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, especially when you consider the huge resources that are being thrown at this (as an aside, the same also applies to investing; NEVER get married to any one theme- always be ready to change your mind if the facts change!)
Right now, I don’t doubt you’re getting that angry letter ready to send in to me because you’re so convinced about your views being the right ones. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. But don’t get so hot under the collar. Stay objective, be open-minded and be prepared to admit to being wrong. If you want to play ‘dress-up like a scientist’, then act like one, that’s all I’m saying.
For what it’s worth, I’m going to state a few facts here that put me squarely in the: “Okay, prove it” camp for now (again, that does NOT mean I couldn’t care less about our beautiful planet and that I don’t habitually kiss trees- it just means that from a scientific point of view, there are considerable ‘holes’ in global warming theory…
Polls show that about three-quarters of Americans believe global warming theory to be fraudulent. That doesn’t mean they’re right, but it gives us some perspective to start with.
The recent whistleblower revelations came as no big news to anyone following this debate closely; the climate model the UN relies on PURPOSELY hides the ‘Medieval Warm Period’. The University of East Anglia where this started now actually admits that the CRU has no evidence the climate is warming.
Next, the EPA is trying to claim that CO2 is a pollutant (we breathe it all day long). They say that anymore CO2 in the atmosphere will be cataclysmic, despite there being no evidence about this and that the CO2 level has stayed constant at 0.038% (trace) since 1850.
Most of all though, the CRU model measures temperatures in the atmosphere. Seems sensible enough until you learn that only 10% of the Earth’s heat storage is atmospheric; the other 90% of heat storage is in the oceans (grade school taught you that water retains heat far better than land, right?).
Okay, so would you agree then that it’s a fair assumption that if the oceans are heating up we have a good case for global warming? I think that’s fair.
Well thankfully, the boys at NASA have THOUSANDS of robots scattered around the world’s oceans that continually dive up and down to measure temperatures at different depths. The data has been gathered since 2003. Guess what? Ocean temperatures are FALLING.
But, I’m happy to re-evaluate the global warming theory as and when new data emerges and I’ll be more than happy to switch camps if it’s conclusive. Until then, I’ll be a good boy and recycle because I love my planet- that’s why I follow this debate closely. Meanwhile, perhaps tax dollars might be spent on something we know is a problem like education and health?
Or maybe this runs deeper and there’s another agenda?
Anyway, let’s talk about those markets…
On the surface, the stock market seems to be chugging along nicely, but underneath the mask, there’s a few eerie developments. The Dow Transports and Industrials keep mis-matching; one goes up but the other doesn’t confirm. One goes down but the other doesn’t confirm (we need a double confirmation to give us a sign of definite action in one direction or another). This is very rare action indeed; as in once in a lifetime stuff.
So what’s going on?
In a word, DISTRIBUTION.
Let’s say you’re a huge fund manager and you think this market is headed south in a big way, what do you do? Sell everything? Well, if you do, because of the sheer size of the shares you’re trying to sell, this in itself will send prices down and you’ll hurt yourself as a result.
Instead, you slowly but surely over time sell your stocks.
Bottom line: it appears as a holding pattern currently and the market can do anything, but I don’t like it. And this is without me mentioning that everything is priced for a robust recovery next year.
What you’ll also notice is some big moves at the last minutes of trading. Seen that lately? That’s funds distributing. Amateur traders tend to trade when the market opens whilst institutions trade near the close when the trend for the day is clearer.
“But what about all this encouraging data?”
What really happened is that the drop was not from people getting jobs but from people rolling over to the extended benefits programs.
Furthermore, I’d like to bring to your attention another way GDP statistics are being skewed from Dennis Gartman:
“For example, when a part for perhaps $100 is imported from China and is used in an American automobile … something that happens more and more and more often these days … the stats show that the finished car is American-made because it was assembled here in the US and in the process the US GDP is raised by that same $100 when in fact it should have been deflated by that figure instead. In the process, American workers who might in the past have made the part in question are no longer doing so and are obviously made redundant, hence a job or jobs is lost.”
I’d love to tell you our politicians are doing a great job and everything will be fine, but in the same way the politicians were stupid enough to bring us to this place, it should be no surprise that these halfwits aren’t going to get us out of it.
You see, they’ve learned a Pavlovian response to fighting off these spoilsport recessions, much like a monkey learning: you simply lower interest rates, print money and leverage (debt) will save the day. But the problem this time is too much leverage in the first place and you won’t cure this by more leverage.
This is a ‘balance sheet recession’. People are paying down debt not getting more.
Bad news won’t ease your worries about redundancy, debt, foreclosure etc. though will it? So why not hedge against those things happening- a bit like an insurance policy? In the last issue I mentioned a few funds you could buy that will increase massively (1000%+) if things get worse to cover your losses.
My hope is I’m wrong, but because I too like to play ‘dress-up like a scientist’, I keep an open mind.