Climate and Chess

[Gary Ruben]

I liked this article on climate. Particularly the part where NASA admitted their mistake and it was actually 1934 which was the warmest year on record on the Continental U.S.

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/...limate-skeptic

I owe the board some chess content. Let's look at the chess scene. Where's the money in chess if you aren't one of the worlds top players? Mostly you're paying an entry fee and playing for a pot you've helped make. In correspondence chess (have to slip this in), there is no money in playing. In the days of chess by mail it was an expensive hobby. Stamps cost money.

Having both organized and played, I found the money is in organizing.

The fun is in playing. Collecting titles really gave me a "buzz". My favourite title is my correspondence International Arbiter tiitle. When I cut out the organizing to play, I won a correspondence IM and SIM title. I'm not good enough to make GM. I've gotten too old.

Now I'm looking for a new buzz. The urge to start playing over the board and picking up an IM title is there, but it's still not strong enough. Making IM at an age of 70 or more would really turn my crank.

I know. You think I'm dreaming. I figure it's all a dream. All you have to do is go out and get it, if you can. Dream Big!!

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: Climate and Chess

I liked this article on climate. Particularly the part where NASA admitted their mistake and it was actually 1934 which was the warmest year on record on the Continental U.S.

What would the temperature in the USA have to do with GLOBAL warming? Do you think the USA is the entire world?

I'm sure some Americans might agree with you if you do, but really...

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Climate and Chess

What would the temperature in the USA have to do with GLOBAL warming? Do you think the USA is the entire world?

I'm sure some Americans might agree with you if you do, but really...

I thought you'd catch on. The point is the terrible errors which are being made in the rush to judgment to prove a point. Even amateurs are catching the errors.

Mann's hockey stick is particularly amusing.

If your trees in B.C. would stop burning in the summer the temperature might cool a little.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: Climate and Chess

I thought you'd catch on.

I doubt you ever will.

The point is the terrible errors which are being made in the rush to judgment to prove a point. Even amateurs are catching the errors.

There are millions of measurements being made every year and more as time goes on. Can you name even ten "terrible errors" out of all that data? I say ten because it should be easy to do as you would expect many more in the collected data due to simple random variances. There is always experimental error in any data set. Scientists have been dealing with this for centuries, and they have developed robust ways to deal with them, using mathematics.

Your belief that a few errors proves the conclusions wrong just shows that you don't know anything about how actual science is done and how conclusions are reached. Before you criticize something you would be wise to understand it properly, as you obviously don't.

But of course, the climate change deniers never make any mistakes in their measurements because, well, they aren't making any of the measurements, are they? None of that messy going around collecting data for them. And they never make any mistakes in interpreting the data because they just ignore any data that they don't like.

Mann's hockey stick is particularly amusing.

What's amusing is your belief that it has been refuted when in fact such claims have been thouroughly refuted.

If your trees in B.C. would stop burning in the summer the temperature might cool a little.

Well, and why are the trees burning more? Why because it is hotter. Or more precisely it is less cool in the winter, allowing the pine beetle to survive the winters, and leading to the widespread death of standing pine. Dead wood seems to burn rather better than living wood for some odd reason. So the pine beetle disaster in B.C. is largely a byproduct of climate warming in the northern parts of the province.

Oh, and they are not my trees. I don't own any trees, not even the furs in my back yard.

How many more climate threads are you going to start?

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Climate and Chess

I doubt you ever will.

Another cheap shot from you. You're a very stupid man, Mr. Seedhouse.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: Climate and Chess

Another cheap shot from you. You're a very stupid man, Mr. Seedhouse.

If one of us is stupid, I will leave it to others to decide, but I am afraid I do not find your opinion on the matter authoritative. Some, alas, might think that when you run out of evidence you resort to pure name calling.

Another source of evidence about the "hockey stick", for those who are actually interested in evidence, may be found here.

[Tony Boron]

Re: Climate and Chess

If one of us is stupid, I will leave it to others to decide, but I am afraid I do not find your opinion on the matter authoritative. Some, alas, might think that when you run out of evidence you resort to pure name calling.

Another source of evidence about the "hockey stick", for those who are actually interested in evidence, may be found here.

Now, Mr. Seedhouse, this science you speak of..., what do the control groups look like ?

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: Climate and Chess

Now, Mr. Seedhouse, this science you speak of..., what do the control groups look like ?

Well, that would depend on the group, wouldn't it? Control groups are necessary and available for studies in medicine, anatomy and physiology and the social sciences, but on the other hand it's hard to see how an astronomer would find one useful or where he would get one. Are you suggesting that astronomy is not a science? Does the fact that Einstein didn't use control groups invalidate his theory of relativity?

In Climate sciences controls are widely used. For instance one does not drill merely one core sample in Greenland and draw conclusions from it. One drills hundreds and compares them. One doesn't do just one measurement, one repeats each measurement many times and examines the range of variability (there is always such a range, two measurements are rarely ever exactly the same). Every experiment is repeated many time and in general it must be replicated before it is of scientific value.

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: Climate and Chess

So Gary went and started one thread with two subjects. Very well I'll followup on the second :)

Where's the money in chess if you aren't one of the worlds top players? Mostly you're paying an entry fee and playing for a pot you've helped make. In correspondence chess (have to slip this in), there is no money in playing. In the days of chess by mail it was an expensive hobby. Stamps cost money.

Having both organized and played, I found the money is in organizing.

Where's the money in anything? People pay money to get something they want. Not too many people are eager for Gary Ruben or other semi-strong players to play chess, so that can't be a big money maker. In the chess realm, people value:
* learning chess
* watching the best play
* playing in competitions
If you want to make money in chess, you have to provide one of the above 3 services. Playing for yourself doesn't cut it unless you are "one of the best".

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Climate and Chess

So Gary went and started one thread with two subjects. Very well I'll followup on the second :)

Where's the money in anything? People pay money to get something they want. Not too many people are eager for Gary Ruben or other semi-strong players to play chess, so that can't be a big money maker. In the chess realm, people value:
* learning chess
* watching the best play
* playing in competitions
If you want to make money in chess, you have to provide one of the above 3 services. Playing for yourself doesn't cut it unless you are "one of the best".

I mentioned there is money for the top players. Once we get down the ladder a bit, the old chess saying comes into the equation. If you can't play, organize. For some reason people assume organizers don't play well and in some cases they are right.

A player doesn't really have to be even the favourite for people to want to see them win. Take Gelfand who just defeated Ponomariov. I think he had an Angel on his shoulder in some of his earlier matches. Then it seemed like he no longer needed the Angel. He was an unlikely winner of the World Cup. Better still, he didn't defeat a unknown. He defeated a player who had previously won the World Cup and became the FIDE World Champion. Ponomariov. It was actually a dream match, I think.

I'm not even sure what he won. I suspect it was either a chance to play the World Champion or a chance to play in a round robin event. The winner of the round robin event playing for the World Championship. Maybe someone will explain the format.

You did make a good point about learning chess. I forgot about teaching chess as a way of making money. I never taught chess - for money. I did it for free. Around a dozen kids at a YMCA. Once a week. It was almost half a century ago.

[Lawrence Day]

Re: Climate and Chess

Gelfand won $96,000 U.S. and a qualification to the Candidates.

Re climate: Science requires verifiable data. The Brit's was rigged and NASA's unavailable for verification. Hence "science" is impossible and the argument (from a chess perspective) is over gullibility.

Aren't aluminum dioxides (from 'chemtrails') and uranium dioxides (from DU combustion) anthropogenicly added to our atmosphere?

In the near future science will rescue itself from military/industrial self-interests.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Climate and Chess

Thanks for clarifying where the World Cup is currently in the championship qualifiers.

There seems to be more negative press being given to the "science" these days. Here's another one.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/...aims-dont-add/

[Benoit St-Pierre]

Lots of smoke, hardly any gun

Maybe something like this :

http://www.gilestro.tk/2009/lots-of-...-falsify-data/

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Climate and Chess

Hi Gary

Some thoughts on parts of your origin post in this thread:

I owe the board some chess content. Let's look at the chess scene. Where's the money in chess if you aren't one of the worlds top players? Mostly you're paying an entry fee and playing for a pot you've helped make.

Time for another class players' vs. top players' prize fund debate :)?

At least at events like the World Open a class player might end up making more than a GM ... on a one event basis anyway.

My philosophy was that if I studied hard and rose through the ranks I would be a master some day, and then I'd make some real money :). I was very young then :). I have to admit in my whole career I've never come close to making up for my entry fees with my prize money gains (let alone covering expenses like books etc). If someone is primarily in the game for money, I think most everyone who hasn't become one of the top dogs locally, or at least an FM (i.e. given free entry fees) should realize eventually that they have to quit.

Now I'm looking for a new buzz. The urge to start playing over the board and picking up an IM title is there, but it's still not strong enough. Making IM at an age of 70 or more would really turn my crank.

I hope I gather correctly that you are well these days. I suspect many people would love to see how you'd fare in otb chess after decades of corr. chess, whether they wish you success or otherwise :). Keres became strong after being a corr. player for some time, if memory serves.

Back in the 90s I heard about a US player who (exceptionally) made the otb IM title in his late 50s. It may depend how much you are willing to travel to events where you play strong opponents mainly. I went to master level only after being invited to the Toronto Closed (a round-robin), but I didn't have to travel far. I generally don't like to travel, but if strong FIDE events were regularly organized in my city, or elsewhere in the province, I think I could be an IM some day even though I'm pushing 50.

I know what I need to do to improve my game, but at the moment titles are out of reach since I don't travel much. However the late Igor Ivanov said, titles are for children (I'd take the FM title for free entry fees though). For both of us I'd say just push up the otb rating as far as it will go for now, and hope for prize $ like you were playing a lottery :).

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Climate and Chess

How many more climate threads are you {Gary} going to start?

It may not be a bad idea, if older climate threads are getting too long. Plus some people still don't know how to quickly get to the last post in any thread.

Still sitting on the fence on the issue (but still leaning to be a skeptic) I have some lingering questions about alleged climate change. For example:

1) Is there proof that sea levels are rising around the world yet, and if not is it supposed to happen soon? I grant you that Venice is sinking slowly, but is the sea rising or the land dropping due to tectonic plate action?

2) Where are all the extra (and strong) hurricanes we were supposed to get as things worsened, and soon?

3) Why is the Antarctic ice sheet expanding, if I've heard correctly (and Arctic ice receding less very recently)?

4) Am I wrong to assume that after years of warm weather (followed by a short period of recently cooler weather) globally, ocean temperatures would be higher at the moment because water absorbs heat and releases it relatively slowly (setting aside any heating caused by non greenhouse gas pollution)?

5) On the political solution side, if the problem is indeed real, I don't see why money is not spent helping people directly (even relocating them if necessary) rather than transferring wealth between rich and developing countries (the truth may be that it is all part of a plan for a global government, which started with the Club of Rome's dreams for a EU decades ago)?

6) Purely from a selfish point of view, Canadians largely seem to gain if climate change is real, namely through warmer weather. I grant you, if I lived in Vancouver, or another coastal area, I might be nervous if I thought there was even a remote chance sea levels might rise, and I would be urging everyone to take action, including spending lots of money, so that I wouldn't have to relocate to an inland location.