iSixSigma

Global warming..

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Global warming..

Viewing 80 posts - 1 through 80 (of 80 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #45041

    Monk
    Participant

    This is the most active forum, that I have come across and I am eager to know, how this forum can contribute in tackling the cocnern of ‘Global warming’.
    As we all know, there used to be a time, when the weather was quite predictable – it used to rain when it was supposed to rain and so and so forth. For the last few years, it is observed that the weather has become too unpredictable. Six-sigma is widely used to address variability issues, do you think six-sigma can help to address the issue of ‘Global warming’…Think over it and answer as this will be a great service to our mankind.
    Monk

    0
    #145877

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    I  believe through  introducing  SS  into  the  Weather  Casting  Business??

    0
    #145883

    Szentannai
    Member

    Hi,
    I would start with a bit of critical data analysis:
    do you have any data to support the statement that weather predictions used to be more accurate “a few years” ago ?Is this even relevant to the question of global warming ? You’ll have to separate the variability due to changes in measurement and prediction techniques from changes in the weather patterns for instance.Regards
    Sandor

    0
    #145887

    Monk
    Participant

    Sandor
    You are right in asking for the data. I have explained below the phenomenon of ‘global warming’.
    ” Global Warming is an avearge increase in the temperature near the Earth’s surface and in the ‘troposphere’, which can contribute to changes in the global climate patterns. The causes can be natural or human indicted such as greenhouse gases from human activities’. “
    My question was intended to understand, how six-sigma can be used to address issues leading to global warming. It was not intended to discuss on measurement techniques of weather forecasting.
    Apologies for the confusion.
    Monk 

    0
    #145888

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    Before charging down this path, you may want to think about a quote from George Box:  “All models are wrong, some are useful.”   Wasn’t it about 20 or 30 years ago when they said they knew we were going into another ice age?  Chaos Theory, anyone?

    0
    #145889

    Monk
    Participant

    Popularly known as the ‘butterfly effect’…right.
    So what was the key input…which has taken us to where we are today?
    Monk

    0
    #145891

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    I don’t think we understand the complexities of the input variables well enough to say.  We may be dealing with global climate cycles that go beyond our recorded history and current level of understanding of the weather.  There’s a lot of noise out there!  That’s why our weather prediction models aren’t all that great.  Heck, we’ve been gathering tons of data on hurricanes and tornados for years, and we still can’t figure them out.
    Regards,
    “Shooter”

    0
    #145892

    Monk
    Participant

    Does that mean that a systematic approach is needed to identify key variables leading to ‘global warming’?. If the answer is ‘yes’, can six-sigma be used , if no, how do we tackle the problem…….any other approach, which can be applied to address the problem.?
    Monk

    0
    #145893

    Szentannai
    Member

    Hi Monk,
    I think the way you raised the question is fully OK, you only need to fill in the details :))Based on some data – in this case concerning the quality of weather prediction the you stated a hypothesis that there is an effect known as global warming.What I meant is that before you can even discuss the hypothesis you’ll need to seriously check the relevance and quality of your data, which would be the second step in a 6S project BTW.Now, if the question is how six sigma can be used to address issues leading to global warming I would – again- start with looking for data. Regards
    Sandor

    0
    #145895

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Monk,
    This is an excellent question.
    I would like to ask another – what is the cause of global warming? Is it due to too much Carbon Dioxide emissions from cars, smoking valcanoes, burning vast racks of forest, or a deficiency of ozone in the upper atmosphere (to block infra red.)
    Cheers,
    Andy

    0
    #145896

    Monk
    Participant

    Sandor,
    I can understand the relevance of your questions and where you come from…
    Assuming that data is relevant and management agrees to support…what will be your approch? No repeat answers pl. :-)
    Monk

    0
    #145898

    Monk
    Participant

    SSS
    BTW..have you watched the movie ‘Butter Effect’….I am a big fan of the movie…makes lot of sense.
    Monk
     

    0
    #145899

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    Good point.  Maybe we should start am organization to study such things.  We could call it the National Oceanographic and Atmoshperic Administration or something like that.  Just a thought.
    BTW, if we do not understand the weather’s key input variables and its cycles, how can we come to a conslusion that Global Warming actually exists? 

    0
    #145901

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    Monk,
    Can’t say as I have, but will check it out on your recommendation.
    Best always,
    “Shooter”

    0
    #145902

    Szentannai
    Member

    Hi,
    well, I do not want to pretend that I am ignorant of all the debates going on concerning the “hockey stick” curve and other aspects of the global warming discussion … but let’s assume that we have relevant data and furthemore let’s assume that the data points at CO2 emissons as the root cause, so our objective can be the reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere.I would start by a process map sort of analysis of what is happening with the CO2 – what are the sources and the sinks of CO2 in nature – and then a Pareto . And definitely a stakeholder analysis quite early in the process :)) Then I would just go where the data leads me, as opposed to where my political preferences, prejudices etc point….. AFAIK there is too much of THAT in the global warming debate already.
    Regards
    Sandor

    0
    #145903

    Monk
    Participant

    Andy,
    Thanks for the same.
    As a initiator of this thread, I would suggest that let us keep the scope of discussion on issues / causes that are within our control ie. mankind. Let us keep the causes due to nature out of scope of discussion as it is futile to discuss on those, as there will be no actionables out of it.
    Monk

    0
    #145905

    Monk
    Participant

    SSS,
    sorry there was a typographical error. the name of the movie is ‘Butterfly effect’.
    Get a copy and watch it.
    Monk

    0
    #145906

    Szentannai
    Member

    Hi,
    pls allow me to disagree :) at this stage of the project it would be absolutely wrong to exclude potential root causes from the investigation – otherwise we’d be like the proverbial drunkard looking for his keys where the light is on…Regards
    Sandor

    0
    #145907

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    Thanks, Monk. Yeah – I caught that.  The movie “Butter Effect” is a nice little ditty about wakeboarding or something.

    0
    #145908

    Monk
    Participant

    Sandor,
    Good one! The worrying thing is, what you are saying is ‘the fact’.
    So how do u make the drunkard find the keys in this situation :-) and also make him open the lock !
    Monk

    0
    #145909

    Monk
    Participant

    Well, I thought someone from WHO should be able to own the responsibility for that….So who is the problem owner…Is the WHO at the globle level ?
    correct me if i am wrong !
    Monk

    0
    #145910

    Szentannai
    Member

    Good question :))
    there seems to be too much politics around the whole question to have an easy answer to that.Just an example: about 3 years ago I read a small news item stating that the ice-caps on Mars are shrinking. I do not know whether this was true or not but in any case it should have been part of the discussion on global warming, don’t you think?Well, I never saw it mentioned, ever. Why would this be, I wonder?Regards
    Sandor

    0
    #145913

    asf
    Participant

    You’ve been out in the sun too long.  Next you’ll be spending $40,000 to learn how to go to the bathroom.
    Try selling 6s to your grandmother instead.

    0
    #145915

    asf
    Participant

    asf
    Thanks for the response.
    I am sorry I cannot fulfill your wish of ‘selling 6s to your grandmother’, as she is no more.
    Can you contact your grandmother to do that for me please ! :-) Thanks in advance.
    Monk

    0
    #145916

    Monk
    Participant

    Sandor,
    I agree with your concern. You will agree that politics exists everyewhere, in our organisations too. So we use six-sigma so that we bring more objectivity to the problem, which will help the top management to take decision based on data.
    So how do we use six-sigma to counter this ? Ultimately its all about change management..yah!
    Monk

    0
    #145918

    Julian
    Participant

    Monk
    I’ve enjoyed reading many of the responses to your question.  And the simple answer is no – Six Sigma can’t help you solve your problem.
    A common mistake in the use of Six Sigma is to apply it to problems where we already know the solution.  In this case, the solutions and the causes are known.  So we need an action plan and great stakholder/ change management to implement the solutions and then we’ll see an improvement.
    I’m sure many fellow practitioners would argue that Six Sigma is really really useful in lots of ways.  But they’re wrong – this is time to just get on and do something.

    0
    #145919

    Szentannai
    Member

    Hi,
    I would use all the data I can have and be especially wary of any preconceived ideas. I would also start with a thorough stakeholder analysis.In the real case I just do not see the sponsor or champion who has a genuine interest in solving the problem as opposed to promoting some private agenda under the guise of global warming. This is not necessarily so, to quite this degree, in every company. In case it is, there is not much Six Sigma can help there – and I’d tend to think the same applies for global warming as well :(((Regards
    SandorRegards
    Sandor

    0
    #145921

    Monk
    Participant

    Thanks for the response.
    If I would have been in your place, I would have asked myself – “Do I know everything I am supposed to know about this poblem, or I am assuming a lot of things and think some of the actions would work?”
    As you rightly said, we all know that global warming is due to CO emission and depletion of ozone layer. So what do we do?
    We can do the following:
    – Define ‘metric’ that can measure the ‘greenhouse effect’ in different cities around the world.
    – WHO to make it mandatory for all countries to have a plan in place to control the metric, which should keep a check on having any further damage to the climate.
    – WHO should give weightage to this metric in all discussion.
    – UN should start discussing on how to monitor this metric and contol it effectively.
    –more suggestions from your side.
    Currently there isno enought data available or it isnot being utilised for any fruitful purpose and by using six-sigma, we can have a focussed team to work on. Problem is who is going to own it ?
    Ultimately…we re all here to make things better to improve our business, but what is the use if ….we donot have the ‘right environment’ to enjoy the ‘money’ that we have. Think about it !!
    Monk 

    0
    #145923

    Julian
    Participant

    Monk
    Do you really think we don’t have enough meaningful data to solve the global warming problem?
    Of course we do.  As I already wrote, the issue is with people.  Nobody owns cause (amongst other things) it costs too much.  So we need to keep working on the buy in.
    More measurement is exactly what politicians and big business want us to be discussing.  Why?  Because it just puts off the inevitable.
    Act – stop talking – stop measuring and stop analysing!!
     

    0
    #145925

    Monk
    Participant

    Julian,
    I agree that enough is there….so what happens to that information ? How does it reach the common man? Is this information used to creat awareness and how it is done?
    Can you share what data is available with you, so that I can myself get educated on it? I am not trying to challenge you, just asking for more information.
    Thanks !
    Monk

    0
    #145926

    Brit
    Participant

    First question asked should be what ‘could’ casue global warming.  If you are seeing if the issue really exists, then that should be the start.  From there, collect cause and effect data on the different variables and move forward with the most plausible.  Your hypothesis will change if you make the assumption that global warming does exist from the start.

    0
    #145932

    Anonymous
    Guest

    I agree with this approach, which is why I raised the question about the possible link between the green-house effect, Carbon emissions (both natural and by man’s activities), and ozone. (I believe Ozone is opaque with respect to IR.)
    I’d be interested in the time-lines of these paramters – perhaps they’re linked in some unexpected way.
    Andy

    0
    #145933

    Monk
    Participant

    Andy,
    Agree…the data for the global warming will be available at the following website.
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html
    As I said earlier the information is available (like it does in a typical organisation), but what do we d with it? How are we using it to do something production? Any data collection, which doesnot get looked into and communicated is a ‘waste’….should we do a ‘lean’ exercise to scrap all these unwanted data collections happening.
    Monk

    0
    #145934

    Ritz
    Member

    Respectfully, you and Julian are making a causal relationship statement without providing data and analysis to support it.  You have used the words “proven” and “proof” much too often and have moved the discussion beyond analysis into assumption.  As this thread has mentioned numerous times, be careful about your own preconceived notions.  Please document your hypotheses, models, and confidence intervals … and be sure to conduct an MSA before making such statements.
    Secondly, I believe the WHO (World Health Organization) has little to due to studying Global Climate Change.  I believe the organization Andy mentioned would be more appropriate – NOAA (National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration). 
    Lastly, I seem to recall Wheeler having a control chart in one of his Variation books discussing this very topic.  While he didn’t get into the discussion much, I do know that control chart demonstrated statistical control of temperature … not that I’m agreeing with what he did, just pointing out an interesting reference. 
    Interesting discussion – but let’s keep to the facts.
    Ritz

    0
    #145935

    Julian
    Participant

    Monk
    Thanks for the resoponse – now we’re talking.  I need to answer your request with a question:  What’s in it for me?
    There are two broad approached to change people’s behaviour (which is fundamentally what is required to solve global warming).  Either you create something of value that incentivises the change, or you create a negative consequence severe enough that people are forced to behave in the correct way.
    There’s little incentive to change at the moment – who wants to fly less, walk more, recycle?  It generally costs more in time and money than before – so politicians find it very hard to impose these changes and we don’t like them much either.  When governments introduce environmental taxes (negative consequences), e.g. extra duty on gas guzzling cars, the amount they charge (a few hundred pounds) is insufficient to change behaviour when the cars themselves cost £40,000+ for luxury brands.  The consequence isn’t severe enough.
    So one possible answer is to make the consequences so negative, e.g. taxing thousands to make waste unafordable.  Another answer is carbon trading, where you have an allowance for waste and if you want more, you have to buy it from someone willing to sell it….. But can you imagine any politician today proposing such a thing and rolling it out quickly? How would the public really react?
    Of course the most negative consequence of all is the destuction of the planet, but that’s too far off for anyone to risk making unpopular decisions today.
    Fortunately, children are now being raised with a new set of beliefs that caring for the environment really is important, so I reckon in 10-20 years time when they start filling political and big business posts the world will really start to change.  In the mean time we’ll need some significant natural disasters to shock people into acting now.
    Just remember – everyone knows what to do.  Just not enough people care enough to be want to change quickly.  It’s all about “what’s in it for me”
    By the way – if you’d like to read the theory try: Unlock Behavior, Unleash Profits by Leslie Braksick – a bible in behavioural management.

    0
    #145938

    Monk
    Participant

    Ritz
    so …you agree that a systematic structurl approach is needed to tackle this problem…or
    you agree that enough data is not available to make any conclusive statement… or
    you agree that global warming is not a issue that we need to discuss or focuss on, as we are unaffected by this..
    I question to you –
    -> Which of the above statements do you agree to?
    -> Do you agree that ‘global warming’ is something related to ‘change management’ and six-sigma is all about ‘cnage leaders’.?
    Monk

    0
    #145939

    Monk
    Participant

    Julian,
    I am glad that you can ‘think’ ?
    Can you answer my questions …as the answers are hidden in the quesions itself ?
    -> When a mother feeds her baby, does she ask ‘what is in it for me?’ ?
    -> When you hug your mother or kiss your husband …do you ask the question ‘What is in it for me?’?
    Why?
    can your book’unlock behavious’ answer the answer to the above questions?
    Monk

    0
    #145941

    Julian
    Participant

    Hi Monk
    You’re going to have to stop responding so I can do some work….. but as you can tell, I’m enjoying our discussion.  See how I consider what’s in it for me?  Weighing up the positive consequence of reading your responses versus the negative threat that I’ll be in trouble if I don’t finish my work.
    The answer to both your questions is yes.  And I can explain……
    For some people not feeding a baby seems more positive to them – perhaps they don’t like it, or the baby is a fussy eater and it’s frustrating, or they would prefer to let a partner or friend do it.
    Does every grandchild kiss their grandparent out of love or are they looking for some pocket money?
    Does an abusive parent harm a child out of hatred? Or is it because they can’t stand the crying and they want it to stop? Or do they like the feeling of power they have?
    So you see (and we are way off topic here) we all are constantly weighing up consequences and acting according to what is of interest to us – “what’s in it for me?”
    In fact the only case where this does not apply is when there is a genuine mental problem that prevents an individual from bahaving rationally.  But in your case of global warming, and almost all other situations in life, this will be a rare event.
    Now I have to do some work!
    But I’d still be interested in your response.

    0
    #145942

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Hi Monk,
    Thanks for the great link .. I’ll check it out later!
    Cheers,
    Andy

    0
    #145944

    Monk
    Participant

    Julian,
    Thanks for the genuine response. I can understand how you feel…sorry for the disturbance..but I can’t help it.
    First of all, I agree with you that there is a definite purpose behind all the things that we do in life, but there are a few things for which we don’t look for incentives ! This is what I wanted to point it to you.
    Why would you need an incentive for giving a healthly life to your grandchildren? It is their birth right and it is our duty to do it.
    But as far as people think in a manner that everything they want to do…they need an incentive….then their is something wrong in either the way they think or in the way they are brought up ! Ultimately it is our responsibility ..not the responsibility of the politician.
    If you can motivate your own behavious to change the way yo udo things …yo uwill be a role model that your neighbours will follow. the bigger problem is – whi wants to be a role model….
    How does six-sigma come in picture ? its about how to communicate in a manner that people take responsibility for what they do?
    Monk

    0
    #145945

    Monk
    Participant

    Julian,
    BTW. I thought your weekend has alreayd started…Why do you overstretch so much? whats in it for you? Do things that you can enjoy!
    Cheers
    Monk

    0
    #145946

    Julian
    Participant

    Well Monk 2 things
    1.  We always weigh up consequences – read the book I recommended.  Even feeding a baby or ourselves!!!
    2.  I’m in the UK.  I’m off now – not bad it’s 4.45pm and I have finished my work!!

    0
    #145948

    Ritz
    Member

    Monk,
    1) I’m not sure yet, but probably
    2) Most likely, but I really don’t know
    3) No
    Discussion:
    1) I can’t say that using a structued approach is needed to tackle this “problem”, since no one has shown me evidence that a problem exists.  If I were convinced that a problem exists (through data), I would agree that use of a structured, scientific method would be appropriate.
    2) No one has shown me any data, and I have not researched the available information to know if “enough” data exists.  Therefore, any conclusive statements made are irrelevant and illogical.
    3) How can I agree or disagree to a statement without resolution to #2?
    The posters to this thread moved from a hypothetical (can six sigma help understand / solve “global warming”?) to statements of fact (global warming is a validated problem, we know the root causes, so let’s start solving).  My previous post merely points out this discrepency.
    Comments:
    In my mind, you haven’t gotten out of the Define phase.  No one (on this thread!) has presented facts or data, framed a hypothesis, or shown any measurements that indicate a problem.  So, don’t jump to solutions until you pass Define.
    Ritz

    0
    #145950

    Monk
    Participant

    Ritz,
    Enough data is available to take decision…the problem is who is going to bell the CAT. Pl. refer the below mentioned link, which can give you data for the last few decades.
    Again…there are issues like measurement method and measurement study that needs to be looked into….but atleast we need to start somewhere…who will do it and when ?
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html
    Monk

    0
    #145954

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    You know, this whole thread reminds me of the cautions about post-hoc falacies associated with correlation.  I guess some get it and some don’t.
    Regards,
    Shooter

    0
    #145955

    Ritz
    Member

    Monk,
    I firmly disagree, until you list sources of critical factors that are inputs into the model you are trying to create and establish statistical evidence of the relationship.
    I do not believe that a few decades worth of data points is sufficient in determining climate change on a global scale when the average climate cycle can last over 10,000 years.
    I thought we were going to keep pre-conceived notions out of this discussion, yet you seem to have made a conclusion without statistically providing evidence.  Therefore, I can not see how you have rejected your null hypothesis … which must, by default, have been something to the effect of “The Earth’s temperature today is not statistically significantly different than any other time period of Earth”.
    I don’t understand your reference: “…bell the CAT”.
    I did find a link you may find interesting.  I have not thoroughly read or digested the information at this time, but may read-up on the subject.
    http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci/climate-change/basics/
    Ritz
     

    0
    #145962

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    I  believe  serious  efforts  should  be  taken  to  introduce  SS  Techniques into  the  following domains:
    *Green  methodologies and  products
    *Producing  Ethanol  insted  of  the  Methanol
    *Encouraging environmental efforts  by  introducing  Lean tools
    *Encouraging and  supporting the  production  New (safe ) cars
    by  introducing  Lean-SS practices…etc
    Good  Luck

    0
    #145965

    Nostradamus
    Participant

    This should now include the methodology on Divinity For Six Sigma (DFSS) inclusive of new KPIVs such as the Universe instead of environment.

    0
    #145969

    Tony Bo
    Member

    Define the process, the unit moving through the process, etc, etc…..otherwise, no SS involved here………….its a basic search for statistical significance…

    0
    #145971

    mand
    Member

    Monk and all the narrow minded SS morons here might stop and ask:

    why has the earth been warming and cooling for millions of years ?
    why was the “Medieval Warm Period” hotter than today ?
    why did Dome Concordia ice cores show temperature rises preceding CO2 increases for the past 700,000 years?
    why did global temperatures fall between 1930 and 1970, despite rising CO2 levels.
    why do so many people follow the pack like sheep ?

    0
    #145972

    Tony Bo
    Member

    Why ask why…..we all need a “Bud Dry”…..its Friday !! 

    0
    #145977

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    To  answer  your  questions:
    First  please  enlight us as  you  are  the  only Great Mind  in this  Forum.Monk’s Question was  about possibility  of  Involving SS’s  techniques in  Global  Warming?
    If  we  can’t  help  in  “minimizing” Global  Warming,then  why  we  are  seeking for  new safe  green  products and  techniques all over  the  world??
    Yes  we  are  all  glad to  follow  Monk  like sheep,waiting  for  you  to  enlight  us .Have  a  great  day.

    0
    #146017

    mand
    Member

    It seems my questions have put you all off.
    They hint at a fundamental six sigma flaw. Can you guess what it is ?
    why has the earth been warming and cooling for millions of years ?
    why was the “Medieval Warm Period” hotter than today ?
    why did Dome Concordia ice cores show temperature rises preceding CO2 increases for the past 700,000 years?
    why did global temperatures fall between 1930 and 1970, despite rising CO2 levels.
    why do so many people follow the pack like sheep ?

    0
    #146019

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Sam,
    I think there is a big difference between problem solving and process improvement.
    I applaud your approach because you’re studying contradictions. I also share your scepticism, even though I may well be a sheep.
    I view the world’s atmosphere as a lens. As you know, the amount of light refracted into a lens depends on the refractive index of the atmosphere compared to space.
    The questions is what influences the density of electrons in the atmosphere? Is it carbon aerosols? A natural phenomenon as yet undetected? The quality of ozone in the upper atmosphere?
    PS: I’m making this up as I go along :-)
    Cheers,
    Andy

    0
    #146022

    thandi
    Participant

    Forget all preconceptions and chattering of consultants cluttering your head. 
    Be as a 3 year old and ask:  WHY 
    Think for yourself.

    0
    #146028

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    SS as a  methodology can  be  used to  tackle  any  type  of  problem including  “Global Warming”?? 

    0
    #146029

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    Just  explain  why  3??

    0
    #146033

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    I would argue it is not a flaw in six sigma, but an emotional reaction seen many times throughout the history of science.  Basically, it is what happens when people become emotionally tied to an issue, reacting to gut instincts and beliefs.  The world was once flat and the universe revolved around the earth.  Anyone who said otherwise could be put to death as a heretic.  The same holds true for global warming.  Decisions are made without any understanding of the system or the science.  Correlation fallacies are made, but – because the cause of “solving global warming” is so noble – those who question the fallacies are labelled heretics – sound familiar? 
    Being good stewards of our planet is a no brainer – it’s just the right thing to do.  But the pendulum does swing too far in the other direction, as well . . . especially when well meaning people in high-minded places decide that man can and does create global warming without fully understanding the cycles and its inputs.
    Lets bring this into the six sigma world.  Don’t we see this type of “thinking” in almost every place we go?  Even in our black belts and those who are supposed to know better.  That’s why decisions to improve processes are made with incomplete information – looking at only a limited timeframe of data – not understanding the cycles, the noise variable and such.  When the improvement doesn’t work as a result, they all stand back and wonder why.
    I doubt that few of the “we must do something to stop global warming” crowd have ever really looked at the data.  They get their news from their favorite source and buy the latest hype of the day.  And – as you have pointed out – the data is very interesting and leads to more questions and deeper learning of our world and its environment.
    As systems thinkers, I would think the Six Sigma community would have something to add in getting to the data – not adding to the hyperbole and emotion-based decision making.  As Dr. Deming would say, “Off we go to the Milky Way.”
    Black Belt Test Question:  To what was Dr. Deming referring when he made the above statement?  (No Darth – you don’t get to answer ;-)  )

    0
    #146037

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Six Sigma Shooter,
    In a previous message, I was hoping you could share some Deming anecdotes with me ..
    Cheers,
    Andy

    0
    #146038

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Sorry to disagree – all problem solving methods include a ‘differential’ diagnosis.
    DMAIC does not use this strategy – it’s  a cycle of improvement along the lines of PDCA.
    Cheers,
    Andy

    0
    #146039

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Further to my previous post, I’ve been able to confirm there appears to be mininal global warming at the equator. I found the following reference, but I don’t know where I can find others
    “There is minimal warming at the equator, but copious warming at the poles, which is where the ice is – the melting of which is going to cause many of the more severe problems. There is minimal warming at the equator, but copious warming at the poles, which is where the ice is – the melting of which is going to cause many of the more severe problems. “
    Ref. OCRegister
    If gobal warming is due to green house gases I would expect the temperature to increase everywhere across the planet, and not just at the poles. One thing Six Sigma teaches us is looking at an average without considering statification can be dangerous!
    Andy

    0
    #146040

    Six Sigma Shooter
    Member

    Certainly.  I’ll start a thread called “The Sayings and Lessons of Dr. Deming” – see if it gets any traction
    “Shooter”

    0
    #146042

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Many thanks Shooter ..

    0
    #146057

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    We  all  glad to  have a  person  like  you.You  are  really  adding  value to  this  forum.

    0
    #146059

    mand
    Member

    Guru and Shooter,
    Excellent !

    0
    #146098

    Monk
    Participant

    SS,
    Thank you very for your insights.
    If you refer my message header- it asks how six-sigma can be applied to ‘global warming’. As I understand ‘global warming’ is a phenomenon, which in a normal scenerios is considered perfectly normal, whereas under certain circumtances may be diastrous. Refer the link forwarded to you. It is very clear that in last 100 years the average temperature has increased by 1deg. C. How do you explain this phenomenon, which in a normal scenerio should happen in 1000 years. The phase at which the ‘global warming’ is happening is a matter a concern. 
    While I agree to you that sufficient data is not there to say whether the change has been statustically significant, at the same time, you will not disagree that it will take ages to collect data and by the data sufficient data is available to show statistical significance, it will be too late. the damage to environment is ‘irreversible’ and the cost will be significantly higher. So What do we do?
    The question typically showcases a situation, where you see something is a obvious concern to focus on and we ask for data to quantify it.
    What do we do under such a scenerio?
    PS.- refer the headlines at the BBC website.
    Monk

    0
    #146212

    Shaman
    Member

    Monk,
    Two comments-
    1) Make a determination whether or not we can do anything about it.  If it is Global Change, fat chance of doing anything besides learn to adapt and invest in the new ocean front properties in Tennessee and Nevada.
    2) If it is man-made, the only recourse I see is to stop the economic growth of China and India — since there appears to be a direct relationship of economic growth and the increased emission of “greenhouse” gases.  Which would probably mean the forced adoption of “green” technology….which would probably lead to a relatively significant war. 
    Cheers.
     

    0
    #146214

    Monk
    Participant

    Shaman,
    Thanks for your response.  MY comments to your comments:
    1. Regarding the global warming, you can get more information at our website on the left side menu : > click Statistics & Analysis Control charts SPC & global warming.
    2. As regards, economic growth of India is concerned, 60% of India’s populatin is in agricultural sector. So don’t be under the false notion that global warming will affect India negatively. On the contary, it will be helpful in cultivation of agriculture and strike balance in the ecosystem.
    Regarding the economic growth of China, even currently China’s economic growth is the big  flaw. It is much less that what it is actually. read the article written by Jim Womack in http://www.Lean.org website.
    read the above and get back !
    Monk

    0
    #146249

    Shaman
    Member

    Interesting – though I’m still not convinced that the shift over the past 130 of so years is significant (in terms of special cause) compared to the unknown history of temperature fluctuations on Earth. I do believe it may very well be significant for mankind.  We can try to limit “greenhouse” emissions, but it may not mean much in the grand scheme of things.
    I’ll admit to not being fully verssed in India and China economics, but it seems to me that the % of the population that is agrarian may not be the best indicator of their country’s “carbon footprint”.  I would hypothesize that a significant % of the American population was agrarian back in the 1800’s when industrialization started.  It’s the trajectory of the consumption curve that worries me.  I would further hypothesize that the environmental regulations are more lax in developing countries.
    So, in my opinion, do what you can on the greenhouse gas issue … but good luck convincing the developing country’s of the importance when the regimes of many developing country’s are not set-up for an environmental focus.  I think I’ll invest in that Tenessee real-estate … maybe my future decendants can enjoy the ocean breeze.
    Cheers.
     

    0
    #146251

    Terry
    Member

    “It is very clear that in last 100 years the average temperature has increased by 1deg. C.”
    WRONG.  No wonder you fools blindly follow SS.
    Global temps FELL between 1930 and 1970.
    CHECK YOUR FACTS . If you do, you will also see all the nonsense in SS
     

    0
    #146253

    Shaman
    Member

    What is your data source?  It’s often considered appropriate to cite data sources when making claims … especially when being even the slightest bit rude.
    Cheers

    0
    #146264

    Terry
    Member

    Are you a baby ? Do you need to be spoon fed ?

    0
    #146301

    Monk
    Participant

    Terry
    I will hold that my statement that ‘ It is very clear that in last 100 years the average temperature has increased by 1 deg C’ as true. If you don’t agree, thats your problem. I cannot change your opinion. You can hold on to your truth….I don’t mind :-)
    Regarding the six-sigma, you have the right to express your opinion in this forum. At the same time, what you say, has to solve some purpose. I can’t see any rationale in your statemet ‘ No wonder you fools blindly follow SS’. You are free to live in your own world of illusion.
    Yah, if six-sigma is nonsense, it is fine. What do you believe in ?
    What value are you adding to the original message?
    Monk

    0
    #146304

    Monk
    Participant

    Shaman,
    First of all, I will request you to go to http://www.india.gov.in website and know about India. If you make a statement with half knowledge, you need to be very careful and that my prove to be suicidal for you.
    As far staying in Nevada or Tennessee is concerned, it is just a matter of time, for you to make you realise that ‘it doesnot matter where you stay, globl warming is going to affect you’. It might happen that a big Tusami / thunder-storm can hit Nevada or Tennessee and then you will remember my words and …..it will be too late by then. In other words….’ wake up to Face the reality ! don’t run away from it’.
    Monk

    0
    #146306

    Terry
    Member

    Monkey,
    I can understand you not having the brains to do your own reseach.
    These might get you started, you sad sod ..
    http://vathena.arc.nasa.gov/curric/land/global/climchng.html
    http://www.oism.org/pproject/
    http://www.oism.org/pproject/
    http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-08-18/dioxide.htm

    0
    #146312

    Monk
    Participant

    Terry
    Thanks for the information. I will go through it and get back.
    There is nothing wrong in not having brains and admitting it..atleast it will lead to something positive. SO I accept that I am here to get knowledge from learned people like you….but have you given a thought about yourself….if not….start doing it ..right now !
    Monk

    0
    #146318

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Sam,
    First I like your list of questions. Even after the Houston Chronicle published a big article on how badly the Texas coast would get hammered this year – worse than last year (and I sat through Rita) – I moved to the coast because looking at it like any other SS process they seemed to have decided that Hurricanes are related to one x and that is water temperature. They claimed the water temperature has risen 3 degrees. There is a threshold for hurricane formation that is dependent on one facter (water temperature) and it is sensitive to a 3 degree shift? They failed to mention that the shift had taken place over 27 years. Anyone who has done more than a couple dives (SCUBA) has run across a thermocline and seen that there are significant temperature shifts rumnning through the GoM constantly. No credibility.
    Now we have made it through hurricane season with virtually no activity at all nobody wants to discuss last years article or accept responsibility for the garbage that was published. The lack of activity is being explained as a wind sheer that is cutting off the tops of the formations before they become hurricanes. Another X and possibly an interaction?
    First I don’t see the “fundamental flaw” in six sigma even though I did not take the time to read the entire string. If anything it demonstrates that when people do not stick to the Y = f(x) and they choose to latch onto their favorite x and things seem out of control.
    We have allowed the Global Warming thing to drive panic. We have people who claim that processes have to be stable to take data and make assumptions. If this is a SS thing let’s see the MSA and lets see the infamous stability tests before we start to draw conclusions. It is a system that people don’t understand and at the drop of a hat will run freely through the streets screaming that the sky is falling.
    1 degree C over 100 years? That is amazingly stable for a system with this many inputs and this large. The heater and air conditioner in my home are lucky to do that well.
    Just my opinion.
    Good luck

    0
    #146433

    Shaman
    Member

    Monk,
    Let’s be very clear: I made a hypothesis.  You seem to be the one making statements.  Backing them up with information from government sponsored web sites does not engender confidence in data sources.  As far as “suicide” is concerned, you should consider taking care of yourself.  You have yet to provide any solid evidence for your assertions that global warming exists or can be ameliorated.  I think Ritz was the one who said somethign to the effect that 130 years of data is not sufficient evidence for a planet that is roughly 3.4 Billion year old.  I tend to agree, and any good practitioner of six sigma would as well.
    I think you are too focused on proving “man-made” causes without pausing for consideration of global cycles of warming and cooling.   Did you at least take a look at the link I posted?  Note the impartiality of the discussion … something you seem to have a hard time with.
    Going back to your original post, six sigma is not supposed to be used to prove a point (much less a political one!) … six sigma is to be used to make improvements to processes with statistically validated root causes of defects.  Until you provide evidence, your entire argument is moot. 
    Cheers

    0
    #146655

    WHOfan
    Member

    The WHO are indeed at a global level.  Their music is well-known worldwide.  Why did no one think of asking them to solve global warming before now?  Genius!

    0
    #146656

    WHOfan
    Member

    The WHO are indeed at a global level.  Their music is well-known worldwide.  Why did no one think of asking them to solve global warming before now?  Genius!

    0
Viewing 80 posts - 1 through 80 (of 80 total)

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.