June 19, 2005
Interesting reading from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (which until now I never heard of but I don’t know the significance of that). They report the results of research literature to conclude that increases of CO2 in the 20th Century have
… “produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gases like CO2 are in error and do not conform to current experimental knowledge.”
They also go on to say
“Greenhouse gases cause plant life, and the animal life that depends upon it, to thrive. What mankind is doing is liberating carbon from beneath the Earth’s surface and putting it into the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living organisms.”
I find that an interesting perspective that I haven’t given too much thought about, e.g. we are actually helping living organisms. So what happens when living organisms thrive in ways different than now?
June 10, 2005
The Economist is a global publication with a blue-chip, global, business leader readership. In this week’s issue (June 2005), they publish an article on Project Management which is also available on their web page.
Interesting to me was:
- that they published this,
- that they are able to focus attention on a key cause of project “failure” on overly optimistic assumptions about costs and revenues,
- that the Project Management Institute (PMI) gets some attention in the magazine (due to their PR department no doubt but no reason to be cynical about this)
- that they end on a positive note to give specific examples of where project-based companies have great success.
I do have a nit to pick about their implied criticism of the
“Although oil has entered the pipeline at Baku, it will be another six months
before the high-grade steel pipe is full and ready to disgorge on to tankers in
I’m quite sure the project managers were fully aware of the time it takes to fill a long pipe with fluid before stuff comes out the other side. I can only imagine that The Economist write is guilty of “over optimistic assumptions” about how pipelines work.
June 1, 2005
Seth describes, very eloquently, why I also don’t expect to get into being a receiver or creator of “podcasts”. Just takes too long. (Thanks Jack).
Update. I changed my mind.