Um, not to be painfully pedantic, but technically our present medium of exchange fails the definition of “money” and ought to be properly called “currency”.

A currency is a medium of exchange. Money adds to the definition that it ought to also be a “store of value”. Back when our currency was silver certificates and our coinage was silver, it was proper to call our currency “money” since the value was properly stored.

In the early ’60s we dropped the silver from the coinage and cut the link to silver and gold for paper money. At that point our (U.S. Dollar) currency became a “fiat currency” – one that only has value because we say it has value. There is no intrinsic value. A “fiat currency” has no ability to act as a reasonable “store of value” and so is not properly “money” (modulo a painfully pedantic argument about very short time periods of value storage while you cash and spend your cheque…)

In a very real sense, all fiat currency is “imaginary money” and so it is too late. We already have only imaginary money…

(And gold has “risen” from $270 / oz to near $1000 / oz in the last few years… )

http://www.wmo.ch/pages/prog/www/IMOP/WebPortal-AWS/Tests/ITR649.pdf

“A Preliminary Investigation of Temperature Screen Design and Their
Impacts on Temperature Measurements”
Jane Warne
Physics Laboratory, OEB 09 June 1998

Worth reading to see the magnitude of the differences in overlap periods and the (then, maybe still) inability to explain the discrepancies.

I hope there is some validity to this theory since I really like the idea of paying carbon taxes with imaginary money. Unfortunately, all our money is likely to be imaginary on our present track. Perhaps that is the necessary corollary to imaginary science.

Think of how that chart would look going from 271 to 279.

A year or two ago I read on-line a newspaper article that claimed that local temperatures had doubled from +2 C. to +4 C. Oh the humanity!!!!!!!!!!!

PS: I probably got the link from here…

“Imaginary temperatures might not exist but they can be useful nevertheless, at least if you also allow imaginary $s. [...] Noting that the imaginary components IB, I$ and IC can be anything at all, including negative numbers, this funding can be anything at all. The Linear Theory of complex temperatures and $s therefore agrees exactly with the possible future costs of abatement of “carbon” emmisions and funding of the IPCC:

Real costs = $0
Real funding to IPCC= $anything you want”

Spot on. My $check for further funding of the of the $urgent $work of the IPCC is in the $mail. ;o)

Real costs = $0
Real funding to IPCC= $anything you want

Bob

(Yeah, do a Google search for “inverted centigrade scale” and read.)

So perhaps they were using priceless antique original Celsius
instruments. More likely they are just fudging the data.

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Thiotimoline

Waitresses cover up against cold as burned Maine coffee shop reopens in tent

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS – 1 day ago

VASSALBORO, Maine — A topless coffee shop in Maine is now shopless after a fire.

But waitresses are serving coffee again after the Grand View Coffee Shop in Vassalboro, just north of Augusta, returned to business this week in a tent. One difference though.

The waitresses are covering up because of a recent cold snap, with many of them sporting sweat shirts.

Owner Donald Crabtree says the waitresses are volunteering their time and working for tips as he spruces up a couple of rooms that weren’t damaged by the fire that ravaged his shop in a converted motel.