I don't know. It looks like a controlled demolition to me.

I'm just saying there are unanswered questions is all.

Posted by: annika at 10:17 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.

1 You're just soooo beggin for the truthers to show up, aren't ya? Article to laugh about: http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/2007/04/stupid-paranoid-hilarious-take-your.html Quote that 9/11 Conspiracy Smasher gathered from the conspiracy fantasist's post: "What is very weird is just a month back or so, I posted on a similar fire where the overpass DIDN'T collapse, and I made special note of that fact. NOW, we have an example where there is a collapse! Isn't that special? It's almost as if someone was reading this site and was determined to prove me wrong." That quote from the same genius who - get this - built a chicken-wire frame of a single WTC tower, put a bowl of kerosene at the bottom, lit it, and said in so many words 'No melting, no collapse, WTC collapse was fake'. Brings to mind something a customer at an old job told me: She was a guard at the county jail. She told me that the lengths the inmates went to in order to circumvent or "creatively interpret" the rules so clearly demonstrated their considerable intelligence and will that she was just flabbergasted that those folks were in jail. Her point being that, if they'd just applied that considerable intelligence and willpower to constructive pursuits, they'd be successful, but they keep wasting it on responding to the provocation they perceive in societal and prison rules. They're intelligent, but they misguide themselves. That brings me to these conspiracy fantasists. They have the ability to see the truth - those sites I linked in the previous posts for 9/11 Myths and Debunking 9/11 aren't that hard to understand - but they go out of their way to construct their own world because they see themselves as responding to the provocation from events which they refuse to admit are illusionary (the "provocations", I mean, not the events themselves). They pride themselves on intelligence, but they don't stop to analyze their sloppy thinking, like the folks who seize on any story mentioning how the Bush Administration was warned ahead of time, but then, one thread later, resurrect the old canard about how the terrorists identities were stolen or faked. It's just painful to watch folks who could be smart intentionally lower their intelligence by subscribing to such drivel without critically thinking about it. It's as if they didn't pay attention in their science classes and note the other "observed" phenomena in history that didn't pan out, like the ether, or phlogiston. Juxtaposition is not thinking, it's merely a tool, one of many building blocks on which you organize data to analyze. Yet, for these folks, juxtaposition is evidence enough to leap to conclusions. It hurts the brain to see logic abused so. Anyway, end of rant. Are you just beggin' for some fantasists to come and "just ask questions" again? You thrill cheaply, babe.

Posted by: ElMondoHummus at April 30, 2007 11:27 AM (xHyDY)

2 Yes it does raise questions. Why didn't they burn more of Oaktown?

Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 06:56 AM (Y7t14)

3 Yo, El, the mind can only absorb what the seat can endure.

Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 06:58 AM (Y7t14)

4 I dunno, it does seem like a lot of damage and gas truck do not explode, gasoline is not an explosive. Yes, the vapor if contained in a closed chamber with oxygen added, would explode but this is not what happens when a truck crashes. Gas leaks all over the place and burns. On the off ramp from 695 West to 83 north (baltimore) a similar event took place. Gas truck took the exit ramp too fast and crashed to the right wall while under 695 crossing overhead. Lots of fire, scorched concrete, melted steel but nothing collapsed, not even close. Overpass was a total loss and had to be replaced but I just cannot fathom how burning gas took out that many structures some of which were 30 feet above. Lets not forget that within 10-15 minutes there was water being sprayed. It looks to me like an explosion.

Posted by: Strawman at May 01, 2007 03:53 PM (et8nf)

5 here's some good video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tjs5ILNkJc draw your own conclusions. it was probably just shoddy bay area workmanship, most likely due to labor unions. nyahahaha!

Posted by: annika at May 01, 2007 05:45 PM (WfR6S)

6 Well, quit sittin' on them damn nails, Cas. Jeez... do I gotta do all the thinkin' fer ya??

Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 06:25 AM (xHyDY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

That means you, Will.

Due to the intense boredom initiated by "a very special American Idol," I began channel flipping and became transfixed by the excellent PBS documentary called ENRON: The Smartest Guys In The Room.

[Aside: Let me note for the record that chief Enron assholes Lay, Skilling and Fastow were all baby boomers.]

Anyways they mentioned that Enron was a major promoter of the early "weather futures" market. When I heard that, I thought, weather futures? wtf? now I've seen everything.

But it's a real thing, and apparently weather futures have exploded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. In fact, volume on the CME jumped 64% in the last year alone. It's now a 45 billion dollar market.

But what is it? How do you trade weather? According to CME's website:

CME created a weather derivative market which enables those businesses that could be adversely affected by unanticipated temperature swing or unusually high snowfall, to transfer this risk. It is estimated that nearly 30 percent of the U.S. economy is directly affected by the weather. As a result, the earnings of businesses can be adversely impacted by summers that are hotter than normal or winters that are much colder than anticipated. Just as professionals regularly use futures and options to hedge their risk in interest rates, equities and foreign exchange, now there are tools available for the management of risk from extreme movements of temperature. This sector of hedging and risk management products represents today's fastest growing derivative market.

I guess the deal is that you can buy insurance to protect against catastrophic things that have a low probablility of occurring. But you can't easily insure against high probablility, low risk events like variations in the weather. Playing this market is a way for businesses to offset weather related losses. For example:

A ski resort depends on cold weather to stay in
business. To protect against the possibility of a warm winter, the resort can sell (go short) CME HDD contracts at a level they decide upon with assistance from a
weather-analysis company. A warm winter will result in a low HDD index, and the resort will hope to buy back its contracts at a lower price and use the profit to offset losses in the business.

Posted by: annika at 06:06 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 3 kb.

A couple of geniuses from my alma mater came up with this idea.

Perhaps it needs a little fine tuning, but it's a great idea, no?

h/t TechEBlog

Posted by: annika at 12:36 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.