Ruminations - 13dec2009

George Rebane

• North Korea's currency confiscation
• ebooks and your gizmo count
• Associated Press verdict on Climategate
• Federal employees' pay explodes during recession 
• 'That's What We Do, We're Americans' 

Last week the dear thugs ruling North Korea pulled a sudden currency exchange issuing new won for the old.  But there was a catch, you could only turn in old won to the tune of $180, the rest was literally confiscated by the government.  This, of course, wiped out the savings of untold families and reinforced the shadow or black market economy that keeps things from a wholesale uprising (here).  Britain intends to test this same path.  U.K. Treasury chief Alistair Darling announced his intention to confiscate 50% of all bankers’ bonuses above about $40K.

I’m not a fan of ebooks (Kindle, Nook, …) because they are crippled gizmos adding to our out-the-door gizmo count without providing any more functions that a new lightweight laptop (or even a netbook in a pinch) can deliver.  Web based magazines are now approaching the user friendliness of pulp magazines and allow you to do even more things like search, hyperlink, copy text/pictures, annotate, etc.  Take a look at the Winter 2009 edition of h+, the magazine that covers transhuman and Singularity subjects.  Clicking on the ‘view the digital edition’ link (here) takes you to an interactive magazine format (here) that I believe is the harbinger of things to come as the transition from print to electronic format continues.

(Gizmo count is the total number of different things and gizmos you have to load up with as you leave the house in the morning.  For me it comprises such things as pens, pad, iPhone, ear piece, Swiss Army pocket knife, keys, wallet, Casio Exlim camera, laptop, notebook, reading glasses, book(s), etc.  Anything I can do to lower my gizmo count gets my immediate attention.)

Associated Press just announced on its mobile net that it has had five reporters review a million words of Climategate emails, and rendered a verdict (here).  There is nothing there that compromises the science or conclusions of a global warming caused by humans.  That it contradicts the opinions of technical specialists not funded by pre-purposed governments, should not worry you as a layman on this issue.  Given the quality of the profession today, it is a relief that after “an exhaustive review” these five steel-trap like minds have settled the matter.

USA Today confirms (here) that federal employee pay has skyrocketed during the recession.  RR readers are not surprised.  That's not exacty true, some of our more liberal readership has vehemetly denied this little bamboozle for some months now.  Please fasten your seatbelts for the following -

• "When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000."
• "Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted."
• "The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available."
• "The growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker's pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector."

And finally, this little slide show will choke you up a little.  'That's What We Do, We're Americans' 

Comments

[Russ]

George the lead reporter of the AP story has a serious conflict of interest he wrote some of the e-mails.

On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:
Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
It’s Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
Marc Morano is hyping wildly. It’s in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
Seth
Seth Borenstein
Associated Press Science Writer
[7]sborenstein@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700,
Washington, DC
20005-4076
202-641-9454

Anthony Watts has examine the AP article here and writes:
Mr. Borenstein report upon the investigation of the leaked East Anglia emails, when he himself is part of the emails, is certainly a conflict of interest.

In that story today about the investigation, written in part by Borenstein it says:
The archive also includes a request from an AP reporter, one of the writers of this story, for reaction to a study, a standard step for journalists seeking quotes for their stories.
When the AP allows reporters to report on stories they are involved in, and for them to be able to dance around their own involvment in the same story, it clearly becomes a conflict of interest.

It is, in my opinion, time for AP to remove Seth Borenstein as “science reporter”. I believe he can no longer be trusted to report climate science without bias, due to this clear conflict of interest.

In my opinion the whole discussion of the e-mail is a distraction. They are an indicator that there was scientific fraud was taking place but the code in the computer models was the smoking gun. But, most reporters are not smart enough to examine the code. As one Economist reporter wrote “Average guys with websites can do a lot of amazing things. One thing they cannot do is reveal statistical manipulation in climate-change studies that require a PhD in a related field to understand.” What the reporter was really saying is that he the reporter could not understand the code because he did not have a Phd, so it follows that simpleton bloggers could not either. Yet hundreds, if not thousands, of blog readers understood the fraud, especially when the programer documented the fraud in the remarks right next to the code. It is not the rocket science these dumb reporter make it out to be. So they distract us with discussions of the e-mails, avoiding the smoking gun.

[Russ]

The Daily Mail has a more balanced report here. SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: Climate change emails row deepens as Russians admit they DID come from their Siberian server.

[George Rebane]

Agreed, and thanks Russ for the expansion on this. The whole PhD requirement is a red herring and false. There is nothing that a PhD learns about statistics that can not be learned by any person with an appropriate mathematical background. A Doctor of Philosophy is awarded by accredited institutions to students who have not only demonstrated their ability to expand human knowledge (i.e. to philosophize), but to offer a body of work as evidence that they have already expanded human knowledge (i.e. their doctoral dissertation).

(Before it was debased by the medical profession in the early 19th century, the salutation 'Doctor' was an explicit recognition of such a contribution. Now they award doctorates in almost every field for just learning established knowledge. But that's another story.)

Nevertheless, the layman is bamboozled by all this, especially when professional journalists continue debasing their own profession as you have pointed out.

[bill tozer]

George, I am confused. In the picture above, who is that middle aged woman in the center?

[George Rebane]

By order of "that middle aged woman", a question like would get you shot in the workers' paradise of North Korea. But then, he does look a little like a grumpy old bag.