24

Important stuff – 24 starts up again after the 2nd football game today. Last season ended with Jack Bauer’s death being faked in order to avoid an assassination attempt against Jack commissioned by the Vice President, acting as President while the President was incapacitated. Jack was also being sought by the Chinese for the attack on the Chinese consulate in Los Angeles, while they were looking for information about Marwan and the nuclear bomb. So how does Jack get back into the picture to start the season and who will be the adversary this year? Predictions please. I am unaware of how to apply R2 or even RE statistics to this validation.

I think that the incapacitated President will somehow recover and ask for Jack; the Vice President will be in trouble and this will be an ongoing subplot. The Chinese will be dissatisfied at Jack’s supposed death as being an inadequate account of their demand to try Jack; they will demand to see Jack’s body, which no one will be able to find. I suspect that the Chinese will be this year’s adversary and the main plot will be the U.S. and China going to the brink of war. Jack Bauer will somehow salvage the situation. It’s a given that Jack will salvage the situation in the end, but there will be lots of twists and turns. 2 hours tonight, 2 hours tomorrow. Great stuff.


27 Comments

  1. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Jan 15, 2006 at 9:21 PM | Permalink

    My predictions about 24 were totally wrong – do these count as “blatant errors”?

  2. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Jan 15, 2006 at 11:16 PM | Permalink

    It depends on the statistics you use to analyze your predictions. Don’t forget that for at least some sorts of analysis a negative trend can be inverted into a positive trend and thus your predictions might serve as a good proxy for “24” plots anyway.

    BTW, where does “24” run? Is it a Canadian TV show? or is it cable or what? I’ve never heard of it until quite recently; not that I watch much TV.

  3. IL
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 1:46 AM | Permalink

    This is your blog Steve and you do what you like with it. However I can’t help but add that fascinating though this might be, if you want this blog to be taken seriously as a scientific contribution, then if people have to go through extraneous stuff like this it will rapidly lose all credibility as a serious contributor.
    I’m no killjoy, there’s more to life and enjoying it than science but you need to be clear about what you want the blog to do. If its to include way off-topic stuff, that’s your prerogative, but you attract some good and informed scientific discussion now and those credible contributors will vanish if this place starts to resemble other less credible blogs.
    You can just see what RC would make of it now, ‘the McIntyre TV fantasy blog’

  4. John A
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 2:34 AM | Permalink

    I predict the plot of “24” will get even more convoluted and silly, rather like “Twin Peaks” only with more laughs.

    Do I win a prize?

  5. JerryB
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 3:14 AM | Permalink

    IL,

    It’s just a guess, but I suspect that if Feynman had a blog, it would include quite a bit of humor, and that very few readers of it would discount his physics on that account.

    Perhaps the same might be said of Maxwell, but he was not reputed to play bongo drums as well as Feynman.

    Franklin, of course, could jest with the best, but was still taken quite seriously, even in France.

  6. John A
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 3:45 AM | Permalink

    Just imagine in James Clerk Maxwell had had a blog, Maxwell would have been castigated for the simple arithmetic mistakes that he had a habit of making, despite his brilliance.

  7. Paul Gosling
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 5:15 AM | Permalink

    Re #4

    If you fancy something silly try this

    http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article338878.e

  8. fFreddy
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 5:29 AM | Permalink

    He terms this phenomenon “The Revenge of Gaia” and examines it in detail in a new book with that title, to be published next month.

    Fancy that …

  9. Hans Erren
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 5:32 AM | Permalink

    re 7

    Polar bears

    Why the big beasts of the Arctic could soon be extinct

    Good grief, they may be threatened – as they are hunted – but they are definetely not endangered.

  10. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 7:39 AM | Permalink

    #2 – it runs on Fox and is very popular. It is not Canadian, although, by chance, there’s quite a bit of Canadian influence. The star, Kiefer Sutherland, is Canadian; some of the writers are Canadian.

    #3 – It is, as you say, my blog. Occasionally I try to amuse myself. My inclination would be to delete the thread after a few days, since it is an irrelevancy, but not out of fear of what realclimate would say. If their best attempt to salvage Mann is to say that McIntyre watches TV and was unable to predict the plot of 24, I think that most people would laugh at them.

  11. beng
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 8:56 AM | Permalink

    This is your blog Steve and you do what you like with it.

    It’s his blog and he’ll blog if he wants to, blog if he wants to,….

  12. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 9:17 AM | Permalink

    But Steve, but Steve! If you delete it you’ll mess up all the links to this site (and your ratings) on Google.

    Anyway, part of the definition of a blog is a website where one or more people post periodically on things of interest to them. Demanding that they always post on the same subject is taking a very shallow view of life. Anyway, I suspect you couldn’t get rid of anything silly you managed to say about ’24’ or anything else simply by deleting it. There are people, after all, who use RSS to read new material and would then save the messages, etc. In fact I’d hope one or more people are mirroring / saving this site for future reference.

    And your groupies don’t really need to have some inside knowledge, which only long-time fans would still remember. Unless, of course, you’re hoping to come out with a CD, “The wit and wisdom of Steve McIntyre, Volume 1” (for only $29.95 + shipping and handling), soon. Though, actually, a CD which had the R language, a bunch of scripts, a “Learn Climate Statistics at Home” tutorial, etc. might be fairly popular, even if all the material on it were already available here. If there were a way of getting all the important papers concerning AGW on it too I might even be interested. But getting permissions would probably be impossible.

  13. Paul
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 9:35 AM | Permalink

    Steve,

    I think we’ve found our thread hijacker…

  14. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 9:35 AM | Permalink

    Oh, goody! George found an excuse, sorry as it is, to retreat with honor.

    Since this is a prediction thread, anyone want to guess how long he’ll be able to stay away?

  15. Hans Erren
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 9:50 AM | Permalink

    George, you can always rejoin climatechangedebate, we miss you there!
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatechangedebate

  16. IL
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 10:21 AM | Permalink

    #3 was just my (hopefully polite, friendly advice (IMHO!). Take it or leave it as desired but jerryB #5, Feynmann was taken seriously despite his bongo playing because he had a Nobel prize behind him. Sadly the question of multiproxies, AGW et al has become at least partially political and anything will be used against Steve to distract from the scientific message.

  17. JerryB
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 10:31 AM | Permalink

    Dave,

    I have refrained from wasting words on his blather, but I must take issue with part of your comment: his characterizing the closing of one thread on the blog as censorship seems not with honor at all.

  18. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 10:45 AM | Permalink

    Jerry, sorry I left off the irony footnote.

  19. John A
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 11:01 AM | Permalink

    If it improved the Hockey Team’s statistical ability to near Steve’s level, I’d advise them all to watch “24”.

    What had Bradley McIntyre’s accident got to do with the climate? Nothing, except it was important to Steve and this is his soapbox.

    Personally I find practically all of Steve’s meanderings interesting (apart from his fascination with Lil Kim, which is just sad) so let him wander. He provided more insight in climate science in 3 years than most climate scientists manage in a lifetime.

  20. IL
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 11:42 AM | Permalink

    Personally I find practically all of Steve’s meanderings interesting (apart from his fascination with Lil Kim, which is just sad) so let him wander. He provided more insight in climate science in 3 years than most climate scientists manage in a lifetime.

    You think that and I think that (climate science, not Lil Kim) but there is a big world out there to convince and anything that can be used against, will be. Anyway, that’s enough on doing that point to death. Once more into the breech dear friends…

  21. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 12:45 PM | Permalink

    #11. Beng, the answer – Who is Lesley Gore?

  22. ET SidViscous
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 2:23 PM | Permalink

    http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/13635789.htm

  23. john lichtenstein
    Posted Jan 16, 2006 at 6:30 PM | Permalink

    Another Canadian in this season’s 24 is GW Davies, who seems to be playing a major bad guy of the season. Davies played Nicholas Chevalier, Toronto homicide detective and 300 year old vampire, in the TV series Forever Knight.

  24. J. Sperry
    Posted Jan 20, 2006 at 8:22 AM | Permalink

    I can’t stand it anymore! This post can’t live on with exactly 24 comments!

    (There, that’s better.)

  25. Louis Hissink
    Posted Jan 21, 2006 at 2:42 AM | Permalink

    I was in a store today and spotted two “24” dvd’s. Series 1 and Series 2, in both cases the second halves of each series, the first halves not on the shelf. What retailer would do that!

    Now I am interested 🙂

  26. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Aug 28, 2006 at 2:44 PM | Permalink

    Did anyone else watch the Emmies last night? 24 got lots of awards, including Kiefer Sutherland (who’s from Toronto) as best actor.

    If you watched closely, there was a flashback that had some climate significance. There’s a well-known old article from the National Geographic on the very cold winter of 1976-77. I remember this winter because I worked in Ottawa that year, travelling down in December 1976 and learned about block heaters. The National Geographic article talked about why the winter was so cold and its impact on the next summer.

    At the Emmies last night, there was a short profile on Dick Clark of American Bandstand who was honored. He also did New Year’s Eve shows. The flashback was to New Year’s Eve of 1976-1977 when he was bundled up and complaining that he’d never been colder in his entire life.

    BTW my prediction for the plot was probably one year too early. When the season ended last year, Jack had been kidnapped by the Chinese and was on a cargo boat to China.

    A couple of interesting shows have already started this year. Prison Break is another show in the 24 ilk and a new episode is on tonight. As is another new show Vanished, which looks good.

  27. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Sep 7, 2006 at 4:06 PM | Permalink

    Speaking of things that don’t make sense, the seque in Prison Break by which the fired prison guard suddenly materialized at the location where the Scofields had pulled a disappearing trick made no sense.

    On a different topic, did anyone else watch Vouzhny’s 4th set annihilation of Nadal? Amazing.

%d bloggers like this: