Are the Headwinds Really HeadSQUIDS?

by User Submitted

User Submitted by A Paleolithic Fish

On the Piratery Corp Inc conference call, I think Crumpacker missed a major point. It seems evident that one external factor is driving both the increase in global warming and the decrease in global piracy. I’m speaking, of course, of the rise of our cephalopod overlords.

Obviously, cephalopods must be behind global warming. As our soon to be VP/chief science expert Sarah Palin tells us, humans have played no part in the dramatic increase in global temperature since the industrial revolution. She understands the obvious motive that Cephalopods have for inducing more warming: higher sea levels. How better to expand squid market share than by increasing the size of their domain? When manhattan sinks beneath the waves, cephalopods will laughing all the way to the (undersea) bank.

Of course, squid have been directly involved in the vast decline in piracy over the past hundred years. If ‘Pirates of the Caribbean 2’ taught us anything, it taught us that. By eliminating one link of the supply chain (from freighter->pirate->squid to just freighter->squid), cephalopods are realizing tremendous efficiency gains that show up in their topline results.

Recommendation: Short Piratery Corp Inc, long SQUD. They promise to eat their shareholders last.

Ad Sense Ad Sense


  1. horn
    September 9th, 2008 | 4:55 pm

    Would you like to guess how much of the 0.6C temperature rise is from actual measured temperature increases and how much is due to adjustments of various levels of arbitrariness? Here it is, for the period from 1940 to present in the US:

    Actual Measured Temperature Increase: 0.1C
    Adjustments and Fudge Factors: 0.5C
    Total Reported Warming: 0.6C

    Yes, that is correct. Nearly all the reported warming in the USHCN data base, which is used for nearly all global warming studies and models, is from human-added fudge factors, guesstimates, and corrections.

    I know what you are thinking – this is some weird skeptic’s urban legend. Well, actually it comes right from the NOAA web page which describes how they maintain the USHCN data set.

    So far, Sarah Palin is right. The vast majority of actual peer-reviewed scientific data shows that AGW is non-existent or unproven. Satellite data shows warming in the range as negative to slightly above zero yet below 0.1 deg C.

    [as opposed to the Earth getting slightly warmer, which nearly everyone agrees on.]

    Also, CO2 follows temperature increases [as does CH4] not the other way around as Al Bore would have you believe.

    Temps lead CO2 by 800 years +/- 200:

    authored by top scientists at Scripps/UCSD, Institut Pierre Simon Laplace, Polar Research Institute of China, and the Arctic/Antarctic Research Institute of St. Petersburg, among others.
    The direction of the causal relationship can be shown in many ways: for example, it is not just CO2 but other gases such as methane/CH4 that follow temperature over hundreds of thousands of years. The flawed premise of CO2 as the primary reason does not explain why these other gases are correlated, too. In fact, CO2 and CH4 play the very same role in the ice core records.

    Deep sea temperatures warmed by ~2oC between 19 and 17 ka B.P. (thousand years before present), leading the rise in atmospheric CO2 and tropical surface ocean warming by ~1000 years. The cause of this deglacial deep water warming does not lie within the tropics, nor can its early onset between 19-17 ka B.P. be attributed to CO2 forcing. Increasing austral spring insolation combined with sea-ice albedo feedbacks appear to be key factors responsible for this warming.

    As NOAA themself writes on their website: ‘Water Vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, which is why it is addressed here first…. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change, but as yet is still fairly poorly measured and understood.’

    Contrast this with the 0.30-0.35% of the Earth’s atmosphere that is CO2, with the overwhelming majority of that created by natural processes.

  2. Hans Moleman
    September 9th, 2008 | 10:44 pm


    O.k. so anthropogenic global warming is a scam. Whatever. You can’t sell the solution (edible emissions) if you don’t first sell the problem, so quit confusing people with your “facts”.

    Anyway, the real question here is: how to win the war on squid? This is the defining question of our time.

  3. Arnold Squidanateuurrr
    September 10th, 2008 | 10:05 am

    “Hey shareholder, remember when I told you I’d eat you last?
    I lied”

  4. September 10th, 2008 | 10:47 am

    Al Bore? I should delete your comment just for that, lame. Childish, good, but unfunny bad.

    And the idea that Sarah Palin is right about anything or that she is some kind of “thinker” or whatever is crazy. She’s a speech reader. She’s a polished presenter. But nothing she has said in weeks on anything that matters has come from her own brain or is her own thought.

    Furthermore, not to be an elitisit, were that what she has said is her own thought, someone who is a comm major from Idaho is not who I lean on to get a greater understanding of the debate about anthropgenic global warming.