Sign of the times

Why stop at kids just protesting climate change?

It’s election time. NSW opposition leader Michael Daley said he supports the climate strike by school kids as a democratic right. Given the kids are being brainwashed with only one side of the debate, perhaps the teachers might show them these two front covers from Time and debate why the scientists were wrong and could they be making the very same mistakes again?

Yet why stop at letting kids take a day off school to protest climate change? Why not strike over the rebuild of the Allianz Stadium? Perhaps demonstrate over the West Connex motorway? How about screaming inside Woolworths over milk prices paid to farmers? Why not protest The price of electricity? Anemic wage growth? Housing prices? Negative gearing? Offshore detention? Immigration?

Using kids as political pawns is disgraceful on every level. Parents and teachers who back this type of activism need to be schooled themselves in common sense. So weak must the arguments be to have to let kids do the bidding for them.

Perhaps teachers should look in the mirror and come up with answers to the sustained slump in our global PISA rankings for English, maths and science first before organizing excursions to support ideologies that don’t have any relation to the curriculum.

The reality is when kids from other nations blitz them in the real world in later life, those participation trophies will do little to assuage their anxiety much less make their lives happier in a climate that won’t have turned out anyway like they were force fed.

Fake News about Boeing’s CEO & Trump call

Business Insider has reported that the Boeing CEO Dennis Mullenberg pleaded with President Trump to prevent the MAX8 from being grounded. Here’s why the story is totally implausible:

1) the Boeing board would have Mullenberg’s head if he entertained the prospect of getting Trump to influence the regulator.

2) that would imply the FAA was susceptible to influence from outside forces. It is clearly not. No president would have the slightest say in the matter. As said in previous posts, the FAA has openly stated it is safe to fly without AOA activated.

3) Boeing has 4,800 outstanding orders for MAX8. Why would it run the risk of knowing it had a Ford Pinto to thrust some short term deliveries to pad its P&L while it knew more crashes were inevitable? Hardly a sensible marketing strategy. Boeing would panic more about losing 4,800 orders than delaying the delivery of 100 planes in coming months. Why run a greedy corporate narrative?

4) airlines can’t immediately switch to Airbus A320s as they’d join the end of the queue of the 4,000 outstanding orders. Moreover airlines can’t switch pilots from B737 to A320 on a whim. Airlines can’t wait 6 years for deliveries.

Boeing spokespeople said clearly it was a call to reassure safety. That’s a basic given. Why try to even make up a story about suggesting Trump and Mullenberg were involved in a conspiracy? More TDS. Shameless.

RBA is the new axe on climate change.

EC2469EB-3AC1-4DD3-AFED-C0D36EE97B67.jpeg

The RBA can barely manage interest rates so where does it get off babbling on about how climate change is going to maim the economy? Stay in your lane!  Even worse the speech based its assertions on the prophecies of the IPCC and BOM, two of many organizations which have been caught red handed manipulating climate data. CM thought the science was settled? If so, what is the point of so many climate bodies fiddling the figures? Why can’t the RBA open its ‘assess all risk’ lens? Wouldn’t data malfeasance constitute a red flag in the RBA’s internal analysis? Clearly not.

While the RBA is there to manage risk, why doesn’t it try evidence based research? Perhaps try look at the debate on both sides of the argument rather than follow an ideology because it feels the need to virtue signal by joining the herd.

Well if the economy collapses under its watch they can blame a drought, a flood and a bushfire rather than poor stewardship of monetary policy. Maybe the RBA might look at the perilous financial state our main banks find themselves in. Maybe the bank managements being attacked in the Royal Commission can blame climate change for the sudden hot blooded mistakes they made.

What a farce.

391 vs 242

C1944ECA-BF79-453F-8AED-65DA5129A11D.jpeg

UK PM Theresa May had her mildly watered down Brexit proposal scorched to the lower end of expectations at 391-242. The BBC wrote that the plan had “thrown Brexit into confusion” but it couldn’t be any clearer. Leave with No Deal. Any links to the EU contravenes the spirit of the referendum. The BoE has walked back it’s original scare stories of no deal economic catastrophe. What will postponing Brexit do with such a gap? If it were 317-316 one could understand but no motion that tinkers at the edges will be successful if the rift remains this wide.

Ocasio-Cortez took bank bashing to new levels

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took bank bashing to new heights yesterday. While questioning Wells Fargo CEO Timothy Sloan she suggested that the banks that financed fossil fuel companies which cause environmental damage should pay for cleanups. Sloan correctly said WF doesn’t “operate” the pipelines of their customers.

She also accused Sloan of Wells Fargo lending to publicly listed corrections companies which operate ICE detention centers which detain children.

So basic is her level of understanding of how banks work, perhaps she might understand the ridiculousness of her own attacks better if she is told she has to accept financial punishment for any failures that are a result of implementing the Green New Deal.

The Democratic leaders really need to rein her in before she damages the brand any further. Left to her own devices she’ll provide hours of video gaffes come election time. Attacking Sloan had no basis let alone substance.

Boeing 737 MAX-8 – question the pilots not the plane

There is something to be said about the group think behind countries stepping up to ground the 737 MAX-8. Of course safety is of maximum importance. It always is. However had the FAA held the slightest inkling that switching off the Boeing 737 AOA would still cause crashes it would be grounded immediately. The FAA is comfortable that airlines that follow the updated airworthiness directive (AD) will not experience danger. So confident in that decision the AD called for a continuation.

If anything blanket groundings are more a slap in the face of pilots in questioning their skill to fly these planes without all of the gizmos. As a passenger you should question the airlines that ground as a reflection on the level of pilot training and confidence in them during a crisis situation.

It’s a bit like having your parking camera and sensors go on the blink. Is reversing into the car space with your left arm on the passenger seat looking over your shoulder impossible without these aids? No. Do you stop driving your car because you’re afraid you can’t park it? The problem is all of these aids are to a point dumbing down the ability to drive using feel. Perhaps we should demand The NHTSA grounds Tesla for the spate of autopilot accidents ending in death of drivers.

Would Boeing risk such massive corporate negligence by letting the planes still fly if they had the slightest doubt switching off the AOA would cause more crashes? This is not a Ford Pinto moment. It’s a serious flaw to be sure but the plane has got a clean bill of health without autopilot AOA. That’s why the FAA hasn’t grounded it.

Boeing assures customers it has a software upgrade to be released in coming weeks. There are 4,800 orders outstanding. The new Leap X engines are so much more efficient than the CFM-56 variant they replace. The secret sauce in the engines is made by NGS Advanced Fibers (50% owned by Nippon Carbon) in Japan. Airlines want them. Period. Efficiency helps them stay in business.

The Boeing 737 fleet has done around 1 billion flight hours combined. This is a 50 year old plane which has been modernized. Think of it like a Porsche 911. The basic shape is the same. The plane is airworthy. The software is faulty. As passengers we should pray that the pilots have the skills when the systems fail, not fail when the systems let them down.

Trump is right to cut NSF funding – here’s why

So the media unsurprisingly hurled abuse at Trump for his plans to cut National Science Foundation (NSF) funding by $1bn. Typical. Yet maybe it’s worth reminding ourselves how the NSF has misappropriated taxpayer funds with such reckless negligence. No doubt if Obama (who raised its budget $1.5bn which in office) had lopped $1bn off the NSF budget on discovery of the below the media would be in raptures.

The NSF is a US government agency responsible for allocating 24% of science funding. It was raked over the coals by the US Senate for gross mismanagement, fraud and waste. The “National Science Foundation: Under the Microscopepaper from 2011 documented some of the misappropriation of funds as follows,

An $80,000 study on why the same teams always dominate March Madness”, a “$315,000 study suggesting playing FarmVille on Facebook helps adults develop and maintain relationships”, a study costing “$1 million for an analysis of how quickly parents respond to trendy baby names”, a study costing “$50,000 to produce and publicize amateur songs about science, including a rap called “Money 4 Drugz,” and a misleading song titled “Biogas is a Gas, Gas, Gas”;” a study costing”$2 million to figure out that people who often post pictures on the internet from the same location at the same time are usually friends”; and “$581,000 on whether online dating site users are racist”.Ineffective management examples, cited in the report, included “ineffective contracting”, “$1.7 billion in unspent funds sitting in expired, undisbursed grant accounts”, “at least $3 million in excessive travel funds”, “a lack of accountability or program metrics to evaluate expenditures” and “inappropriate staff behavior including porn surfing and Jello wrestling and skinny-dipping at NSF-operated facilities in Antarctica”.

Sorry, which part of lopping $1bn would taxpayers be upset by?