Does basic cybernetics prove that estimating our methane emissions is impossible?

[teo123]

OK, let's then not talk about the aerobic methanotrophic bacteria on pastures until the atmosphere on this forum calms down a bit. Let's talk about something else in the meantime...

The large feedlots started finishing cows on grain in a big way in the 50's. That's when it started taking over as the dominant practice and beef demand exploded. Incidentally it's probably part of WHY demand exploded.

Yet again, you seem to buy into antiquated 18th-century and 19th-century ideas about economics, in this case the Say's Law. "Supply creates its own demand.". Do you think the Say's Law is right? If so, how it is that the vast majority of modern-day economists reject it? Admittedly, the Say's Law is not as universally rejected as the Labour Theory of Value (which you also seem to buy into with your philosophy about agricultural subsidies), but subscribing to it in this day and age is just weird.

But, yeah, people educated in linguistics often tell me, when they are first presented with the ideas I advocated in my paper "Etimologija Karašica", that I am a couple of generations behind. That the debate of whether Illyrian is centum or satem has kind of been settled in that it is now generally accepted that "Illyrian language" was not a single language, but a group of distantly related Indo-European languages, some of which were presumably satem and some of which were presumably centum. I think that the evidence supports the notion that Illyrian was centum and that the argument of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names being statistically significant hasn't even been brought up, much less throughoutly debunked. Linguists couldn't think of it before the Information Theory was discovered. And even now, most linguists are profoundly ignorant of the Information Theory. So, in this case, I think subscribing to an "antiquated" theory is justified.

[brimstoneSalad]

The large feedlots started finishing cows on grain in a big way in the 50's. That's when it started taking over as the dominant practice and beef demand exploded. Incidentally it's probably part of WHY demand exploded.

Yet again, you seem to buy into antiquated 18th-century and 19th-century ideas about economics, in this case the Say's Law. "Supply creates its own demand.".

Teo, don't "yet again" me. You should know better than to strawman statements I've made on economics and misrepresent me -- that "yet again" is on you.

People liked beef more when it stopped being so tough and chewy and got softer and more marbled with fat. The quality of the product changed, that's what I was talking about.
When quality is held constant, there is a certain demand for a commodity at each price point. This is well known. It's normally inversely proportional, aside from veblen goods.

It can go up in some instances when price falls, though not always much. It depends on the product. It is particularly the case for food, though, when one food option may outcompete another on price if those two can be substituted for each other. If beef is $2 and chicken is $2 people will probably mix and match for taste, and both may have equal demand. If beef drops to $1.50 and chicken remains at $2, this can have a dramatic effects when economic necessity weighs against taste. People may also start opting for beef more often when they would have wanted it but prior could not afford it. All of these elements can factor in to produce a higher demand at a lower price. It's not the larger supply creating the demand, but the lower price point due to a more efficient production process which made a larger supply possible.

Your trigger happy accusations which are themselves ill-informed and your conspiratorial rants on economics are enough. I didn't read the rest. I think you need a break from the forum, Teo. Come back in a year and a half and don't be annoying next time. You won't be formally banned if you step away on your own.

[teo123]

OK, two things before my long absence...

First, my Control Engineering professor asked me via e-mail to delete his name from the opening post (It is at the end of that post). However, the forum for some reason isn't allowing me to edit that post. @brimstoneSalad, could you please do that for me? My Control Engineering professor doesn't want his name to show up on Google as if it is related to Internet forums.

Second, my diagram presenting the results of the computer simulation if you assume the half-life of the methane in the atmosphere is 9 years, which I posted here, is wrong. I screwed something up in LibreOffice while making it. Here is the (I hope so) correct diagram:

[brimstoneSalad]

@teo123 Done. Please abstain from posting for 1.5 years, and be less annoying next time.