Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Global Climate Change - NASA

40 views
Skip to first unread message

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 7, 2012, 1:16:51 AM3/7/12
to
Global Climate Change - NASA
climate.nasa.gov/

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 7, 2012, 8:57:15 PM3/7/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thread to the top of the group.

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 8, 2012, 12:08:54 AM3/8/12
to
as apposite to nicorclimate change,
which of course is much more extremer.

my favorite picture on the NASA site is the series
from Skylab, showing sunclipse or sunsight --
several times per day, it might get boring.

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 8, 2012, 1:08:00 AM3/8/12
to
I meant,
as apposite to MICROrclimate change,
> which of course is much more extremer.
>
> my favorite picture on the NASA site is the series
> from Skylab, showing sunclipse or sunsight.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 8, 2012, 2:05:34 PM3/8/12
to
On Mar 7, 9:08 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
This is one of my favorite web pages, it shows how important it is to
understand phytoplankton blooms.

http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi/image_archive.cgi?c=CHLOROPHYLL

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 9, 2012, 2:14:00 AM3/9/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bumping this thread up to the top

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 10, 2012, 8:36:35 AM3/10/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

Tom P

unread,
Mar 10, 2012, 9:16:57 AM3/10/12
to
On 03/07/2012 07:16 AM, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

You don't seriously expect deniers to be interested in facts, do you?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 10, 2012, 9:52:14 AM3/10/12
to
na, but its worth a try, think of it as an open door policy just in
case any of them want an intervention or need assistance when they
leave thier cult of denialism.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 11, 2012, 10:00:54 AM3/11/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 12, 2012, 9:13:12 AM3/12/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

Falcon

unread,
Mar 12, 2012, 9:41:19 AM3/12/12
to
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 06:13:12 -0700 (PDT), columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote ...
(I)

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 12, 2012, 9:43:07 AM3/12/12
to
On Mar 12, 5:41 am, Falcon <fal...@invalid.net> wrote:snip

not much to say?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 13, 2012, 1:41:15 AM3/13/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 13, 2012, 10:45:54 AM3/13/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bumping on up, to the top.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 13, 2012, 4:13:45 PM3/13/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thread up to the top

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 14, 2012, 1:27:00 AM3/14/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thead to the top of the group

|A|G|W|Scaaaam

unread,
Mar 14, 2012, 1:48:41 AM3/14/12
to

"columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com>
wrote in message
news:0ba915b3-736c-47b5...@9g2000pbn.googlegroups.com...
------------------------------------



Scientist: Global COOLING Causes More Extreme Weather, More Frequent
Droughts And Floods!



Leftists/warmists just can't make up their minds!

Is more extreme wether caused by warming?

Or perhaps caused by cooling!



In 1975, Science News published the graph below of northern hemisphere
temperatures, from the National Academy of Sciences.







Since 1940, the temperature of the Northern Hemisphere has been steadily
falling:

Having risen about 1.1ºC. between 1885 and 1940, according to one
estimation, the temperature has already fallen back some 0.6ºC, and shows no
signs of reversal



To gain a perspective on these divergent views, SCIENCE NEWS interviewed C.
C. Wallen, chief of the Special Environmental Applications Division, World
Meteorological Organization, at the WMO headquarters in Geneva.



The cooling trend observed since 1940 is real enough, he says, but not
enough is known about the underlying causes to justify any sort of
extrapolation. Particularly dangerous would be any attempt to generalize
from even shorter-term experience, like the bad weather in 1972 and
following years, to prognosticate any future weather patterns.



On the other hand, the cooling since 1940 has been large enough and
consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed, and we are unlikely to
quickly regain the "very extraordinary period of warmth" that preceded it.



Even this mild diagnosis can have "fantastic implications" for present-day
humanity, Wallen says.





THE PRINCIPAL WEATHER CHANGE LIKELY TO ACCOMPANY THE COOLING TREND IS
INCREASED VARIABILITY - ALTERNATING EXTREMES OF TEMPERATURE AND PRCIPITATION
IN ANY GIVEN AREA

- which would almost certainly lower average crop yields.



The cause of this increased variability can best be seen by examining upper
atmosphere wind patterns that accompany

cooler climate.



During warm periods a "zonal circulation" predominates, in

which the prevailing westerly winds of the temperate zones are swept over
long distances by a few powerful high

and low pressure centers.



The result is a more evenly distributed pattern of

weather, varying relatively little from month to month or season to season.



During cooler climatic periods, however, the high-altitude winds are broken
up into irregular cells by weaker and

more plentiful pressure centers, causing formation of a "meridional
circulation" pattern.



These small, weak cells may stagnate over vast areas for many months,
bringing unseasonably cold weather on one side and unseasonably warm weather
on the other.



DROUGHTS AND FLOODS BECOME MORE FREQUENT AND MAY ALTERNATE SEASON TO SEASON
AS THEY DID LAST YEAR IN INDIA.



THUS, WHILE THE HEMISPHERE AS A WHOLE IS COOLER, INDIVIDUAL AREAS MAY BREAK
TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION RECORDS AT BOTH EXTREMES.







Science News

Climate Change: Chilling Possibilities

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencenews.org%2Fview%2Fdownload%2Fid%2F37739%2Fname%2FCHILLING_POSSIBILITIES&ei=8BsxT7PHIue20QGdgonBBw&usg=AFQjCNHnbfGcNF1FYrFBefyHiDn3MXrzug&sig2=dp2yQ1m1kBE4k3rGyA49uw









Warmest Regards



B O N Z O



"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville



"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."

"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"

William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.



"The claim is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8ºK in
about 150 years, which, if true, means to me that the temperature has been
amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely
improved in this 'warming' period,".

Nobel Laureate Dr. Ivar Giaever:



"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it's not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"

Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author



"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips



"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips



"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-greatly-exaggerated



Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher



"All it takes to find oneself called a 'denier' is to seek a sense of
proportion about environmental problems"

Mark Lynas, The God Species







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





1


columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 14, 2012, 4:03:05 PM3/14/12
to
On Mar 13, 10:48 pm, "|A|G|W|Scaaaam" <|A|G|W|Scaaaam@|A|G|W|Scaaaam>
wrote: "B  O  N  Z  O"

bump this thread to the top of the group

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 15, 2012, 9:00:06 AM3/15/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

AGWFacts

unread,
Mar 16, 2012, 2:43:22 PM3/16/12
to
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:16:57 +0100, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd>
wrote:

> On 03/07/2012 07:16 AM, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:

> > Global Climate Change - NASA http://climate.nasa.gov/

> You don't seriously expect deniers to be interested in facts, do you?

The point, I assume, is to let the denialists know the facts are
still freely available for anyone and everyone to read, so that
they will remain in a high state of fear and anxiety.


--
"I said that I believe in GOOD SCIENCE, not scientific THEORIES made
up by the antichrist. In order for one creature to EVOLVE into another,
the DNA has to change. How do you explain that?" -- dusty...@aol.com

AGWFacts

unread,
Mar 16, 2012, 2:43:22 PM3/16/12
to
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 06:52:14 -0800 (PST),
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mar 10, 6:16 am, Tom P <werot...@freent.dd> wrote:
> > On 03/07/2012 07:16 AM, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:

> > > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > > http://climate.nasa.gov/

> > You don't seriously expect deniers to be interested in facts, do you?

> na, but its worth a try, think of it as an open door policy just in
> case any of them want an intervention or need assistance when they
> leave thier cult of denialism.

The first step is for them to realize they have a problem, and
mentioning the web site is one more little reminder that can help
them take that first step.

A-G-W-Extortion

unread,
Mar 16, 2012, 10:40:16 PM3/16/12
to

"Surfer" <n...@spam.net> wrote in message news:4f63e164$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> "A.G.W..W.hopperrs" <A.G.W..W.hoppers@A.G.W..W.hopperrs> wrote in message
> news:4f62...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> ......Global COOLING Causes More Extreme Weather, More Frequent Droughts
>> And Floods!
>>
> Don't know about frequency, however colder oceans would result in less
> evaporation. The air would then
> contain less moisture that could precipitate on land.
>
> That would imply less severe floods.



Both too little ice and too much ice are due to to too little ice which is
due to out of control global warming which is also leading to too much ice
in the Antarctic which is what we retroactively predicted which is the
opposite of what we predicted last year which is now attributed to global
warming but in the 1970s the identical symptoms were attributed to global
cooling because we didn't realize we could produce fraudulent data back then
and change our story every three weeks and let Greenpeace activists write
the IPCC report and get billions of dollars and and get away with it.



So there!









Warmest Regards



B O N Z O



columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 16, 2012, 10:44:59 PM3/16/12
to
On Mar 16, 11:43 am, AGWFacts <AGWFa...@1800reaklity.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 06:52:14 -0800 (PST),
> columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 10, 6:16 am, Tom P <werot...@freent.dd> wrote:
> > > On 03/07/2012 07:16 AM, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
> > > > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > > >http://climate.nasa.gov/
> > > You don't seriously expect deniers to be interested in facts, do you?
> > na, but its worth a try, think of it as an open door policy just in
> > case any of them want an intervention or need assistance when they
> > leave thier cult of denialism.
>
> The first step is for them to realize they have a problem, and
> mentioning the web site is one more little reminder that can help
> them take that first step.
>
> --
> "I said that I believe in GOOD SCIENCE, not scientific THEORIES made
> up by the antichrist. In order for one creature to EVOLVE into another,
> the DNA has to change. How do you explain that?" -- dusty55...@aol.com

just putting it in their face on a daily basis, always giving them an
opportunity to see the light.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 18, 2012, 1:30:20 AM3/18/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

last...@primus.ca

unread,
Mar 18, 2012, 5:30:49 PM3/18/12
to
On Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:30:20 AM UTC-4, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
> On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>
ø CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
Worm. They refuse go admit the last
interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
Warm Period was global. They do
not recognize the Little Ice Age.
Further they refuse to recognize that
the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
not controlled by atmospheric CO2
or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
warming.

ø The Industrial age was measureably
cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
Period which was warmer than the
last Interglacial period. After each
warm period came a cold period—
each cooler than its previous cool
period.

ø We are now 1600 years into the
the next glacial period and 15 years
into the next cold spell.

ø Forget your stupid "acidification". It
is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi
Yes there is going to be cold spells.
Yes there are going to be storms of
every kind, it is unlikely that any of us
out of school will see the ice beginning
to move toward the Equator.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 18, 2012, 5:41:47 PM3/18/12
to
On Mar 18, 2:30 pm, last_p...@primus.ca wrote:
> On Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:30:20 AM UTC-4, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
> > On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> > <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > > climate.nasa.gov/
>
> ø CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
>    Worm. They refuse go admit the last
>    interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
>    They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
>    Warm Period was global. They do
>    not recognize the Little Ice Age.
>    Further they refuse to recognize that
>    the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
>    not controlled by atmospheric CO2
>    or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
>    15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
>    warming.

=F8 Idiots like you dont recognize that forcing from aerosols,
combines with forcing from green house gasses. This lack of
recognition results in idiotic assertions like above.

>
> ø The Industrial age was measureably
>    cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
>    Period which was warmer than the
>    last Interglacial period. After each
>    warm period came a cold period—
>    each cooler than its previous cool
>    period.

=F8 You have no point, as there are natural cycles, and the transient
actions of humans on the cyclical process.

>
> ø We are now 1600 years into the
>    the next glacial period and 15 years
>    into the next cold spell.

=F8 Human actions actually delayed a cooling period.

>
> ø Forget your stupid "acidification". It
>    is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi
>    Yes there is going to be cold spells.
>    Yes there are going to be storms of
>    every kind, it is unlikely that any of us
>    out of school will see the ice beginning
>    to move toward the Equator.

=F8 your word salad replies only show your ignorance, thus you have no
point. One should forget your idiotic replies as they are
meaningless. It is very likely people like you will spew anything and
everything in an irrational effort to protect the status quo.

gordo

unread,
Mar 18, 2012, 9:42:56 PM3/18/12
to
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 14:30:49 -0700 (PDT), last...@primus.ca wrote:

>On Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:30:20 AM UTC-4, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
>> On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Global Climate Change - NASA
>> > climate.nasa.gov/
>>
>ø CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
> Worm. They refuse go admit the last
> interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
> They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
> Warm Period was global.

It was not global, core samples from ice and coral reefs from
different parts of the earth make it impossible for you to keep
repeating your lies.
>They do
> not recognize the Little Ice Age.
> Further they refuse to recognize that
> the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
> not controlled by atmospheric CO2
> or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
> 15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
> warming.
>
>ø The Industrial age was measureably
> cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
> Period which was warmer than the
> last Interglacial period. After each
> warm period came a cold period—
> each cooler than its previous cool
> period.
>
>ø We are now 1600 years into the
> the next glacial period and 15 years
> into the next cold spell.
We should be heading into the next glacial period but are not.
The BEST study says you are still spouting nonsense. Want to take my
wager on the next 5 years with one of them being warmer than at any
time in recorded history? It is for $10,000 Canadian and so far not
one denier has been willing to show any confidence in what they are
stating.
>ø Forget your stupid "acidification". It
> is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi

Acidification is a fact not a ploy.

> Yes there is going to be cold spells.
> Yes there are going to be storms of
> every kind,
Storms are normal but the kind of storms projected are predicted to be
of higher intensity than what occurs within the natural norm. It is
just what the best scientist using the best tools are telling us.
We have someone in a newsgroup who calls himself lastpost saying
otherwise. Gosh who to believe, all those expert scientists or someone
calling himself lastpost?

>it is unlikely that any of us
> out of school will see the ice beginning
> to move toward the Equator.
I have flown over Mount Chimborazo the mountain the furthest away from
the center of the earth which is further than Mt Everest from the
centre.In this respect it is higher than Mt Everest.
The glaciers over Mt Chimborazo have slowly decreased in size over the
last fifty years due to global warming. This is as close as you can
get to the equator on a mountain top and no,you will not see ice
beginning to grow there when the exact opposite is happening.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 1:22:07 AM3/19/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

Leonard

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 8:18:16 PM3/19/12
to
On 3/18/12 5:41 PM, in article 757568c2-ab02-46a3...@t8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com, "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mar 18, 2:30 pm, last_p...@primus.ca wrote:

>
> ø CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
>    Worm. They refuse go admit the last
>    interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
>    They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
>    Warm Period was global. They do
>    not recognize the Little Ice Age.
>    Further they refuse to recognize that
>    the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
>    not controlled by atmospheric CO2
>    or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
>    15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
>    warming.

=F8 Idiots like you dont recognize that forcing from aerosols,
combines with forcing from green house gasses.  This lack of
recognition results in idiotic assertions like above.

ø ROTFLMAO
   Total idiocy. Who is paying you to
   spread that nonsense??


>
> ø The Industrial age was measureably
>    cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
>    Period which was warmer than the
>    last Interglacial period. After each
>    warm period came a cold period—
>    each cooler than its previous cool
>    period.

=F8  You have no point, as there are natural cycles, and the transient
actions of humans on the cyclical process.

ø That is kindergarten nonsense


>
> ø We are now 1600 years into the
>    the next glacial period and 15 years
>    into the next cold spell.

=F8  Human actions actually delayed a cooling period.

ø more kindergarten stuff


>
> ø Forget your stupid "acidification". It
>    is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi
>    Yes there is going to be cold spells.
>    Yes there are going to be storms of
>    every kind, it is unlikely that any of us
>    out of school will see the ice beginning
>    to move toward the Equator.

=F8 your word salad replies only show your ignorance, thus you have no
point.  One should forget your idiotic replies as they are
meaningless.  It is very likely people like you will spew anything and
everything in an irrational effort to protect the status quo.

        ø Your idiotic crap only accents everything
           I posted. 4Q

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 8:29:28 PM3/19/12
to
On Mar 19, 4:18 pm, Leonard <leonard7...@primus.ca> wrote:
> On 3/18/12 5:41 PM, in article
> 757568c2-ab02-46a3-9f2e-0d20b40e3...@t8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com,
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com>
so you think that makes all 4 logical and rational?

Leonard

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 8:40:30 PM3/19/12
to
On 3/18/12 9:42 PM, in article 1d2dm7hhb59mj1uj7...@4ax.com, "gordo" <grme...@shaw.ca.remove> wrote:

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 14:30:49 -0700 (PDT), last...@primus.ca wrote:

>On Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:30:20 AM UTC-4, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
 
>ø CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
>   Worm. They refuse go admit the last
>   interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
>   They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
>   Warm Period was global.

It was not global, core samples from ice and coral reefs from
different parts of the earth make it impossible for you to keep
repeating your lies.

ø You keep repeating your stupid lies
    and no intelligent reader believes them



>They do
>   not recognize the Little Ice Age.
>   Further they refuse to recognize that
>   the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
>   not controlled by atmospheric CO2
>   or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
>   15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
>   warming.


>
>ø The Industrial age was measureably
>   cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
>   Period which was warmer than the
>   last Interglacial period. After each
>   warm period came a cold period˜
>   each cooler than its previous cool
>   period.
>
>ø We are now 1600 years into the
>   the next glacial period and 15 years
>   into the next cold spell.

We should be heading into the next glacial period but are not.

ø BULLSHIT!!!



>ø Forget your stupid "acidification". It
>   is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi

Acidification is a fact not a ploy.

Ø Sure it is— it is not in any way science.


>   Yes there is going to be cold spells.
>   Yes there are going to be storms of
>   every kind,

Storms are normal but the kind of storms projected are predicted to be
of higher intensity than what occurs within the natural norm. It is
just what the best scientist using the best tools are telling us.
We have someone in a newsgroup who calls himself lastpost saying
otherwise. Gosh who to believe, all those expert scientists or someone
calling himself lastpost?

ø That is what I wrote immediately above


>it is unlikely that any of us
>   out of school will see the ice beginning
>   to move toward the Equator.

I have flown over Mount Chimborazo the mountain the furthest away from
the center of the earth which is further than Mt Everest from the
centre.In this respect it is higher than Mt Everest.
The glaciers over Mt Chimborazo have slowly decreased in size over the
last fifty years due to global warming. This is as close as you can
get to the equator on a mountain top and no,you will not see  ice
beginning to grow there when the exact opposite is happening.

       ø ROTFLMAO
           Gordo Merrick you are insane.
           Best you see a shrink before
           the white coats come for you.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 8:40:38 PM3/19/12
to
On Mar 19, 4:40 pm, Leonard <leonard7...@primus.ca> wrote:
> On 3/18/12 9:42 PM, in article 1d2dm7hhb59mj1uj7p664n3o0bcuotn...@4ax.com,
>
>
>
> "gordo" <grmerr...@shaw.ca.remove> wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 14:30:49 -0700 (PDT), last_p...@primus.ca wrote:
>
> >> >On Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:30:20 AM UTC-4, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >� CAI is almost as stupid as Sam the
> >> >   Worm. They refuse go admit the last
> >> >   interglacial ended 1,600 years ago.
> >> >   They refuse to admit the Mediaeval
> >> >   Warm Period was global.
>
> > It was not global, core samples from ice and coral reefs from
> > different parts of the earth make it impossible for you to keep
> > repeating your lies.
>
> > � You keep repeating your stupid lies
> >     and no intelligent reader believes them
>
> >> >They do
> >> >   not recognize the Little Ice Age.
> >> >   Further they refuse to recognize that
> >> >   the Industrial Age (ended 1998) was
> >> >   not controlled by atmospheric CO2
> >> >   or that tonnes of CO2 are not floating
> >> >   15,000 ft above the clouds, and causing
> >> >   warming.
>
> >> >� The Industrial age was measureably
> >> >   cooler than the Mediaeval Warm
> >> >   Period which was warmer than the
> >> >   last Interglacial period. After each
> >> >   warm period came a cold period�
> >> >   each cooler than its previous cool
> >> >   period.
>
> >> >� We are now 1600 years into the
> >> >   the next glacial period and 15 years
> >> >   into the next cold spell.
>
> > We should be heading into the next glacial period but are not.
>
> > � BULLSHIT!!!
>
> >> >� Forget your stupid "acidification". It
> >> >   is just a ploy to confuse the hoy poloi
>
> > Acidification is a fact not a ploy.
>
> > � Sure it is� it is not in any way science.
>
> >> >   Yes there is going to be cold spells.
> >> >   Yes there are going to be storms of
> >> >   every kind,
>
> > Storms are normal but the kind of storms projected are predicted to be
> > of higher intensity than what occurs within the natural norm. It is
> > just what the best scientist using the best tools are telling us.
> > We have someone in a newsgroup who calls himself lastpost saying
> > otherwise. Gosh who to believe, all those expert scientists or someone
> > calling himself lastpost?
>
> > � That is what I wrote immediately above
>
> >> >it is unlikely that any of us
> >> >   out of school will see the ice beginning
> >> >   to move toward the Equator.
>
> > I have flown over Mount Chimborazo the mountain the furthest away from
> > the center of the earth which is further than Mt Everest from the
> > centre.In this respect it is higher than Mt Everest.
> > The glaciers over Mt Chimborazo have slowly decreased in size over the
> > last fifty years due to global warming. This is as close as you can
> > get to the equator on a mountain top and no,you will not see  ice
> > beginning to grow there when the exact opposite is happening.
>
>         � ROTFLMAO

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 8:41:48 PM3/19/12
to
On Mar 19, 4:18 pm, Leonard <leonard7...@primus.ca> wrote: Your
idiotic crap only accents everything   I posted. 4Q"

you also cross posted to 4 groups not included in the original post,
talk.politics.misc, sci.physics, alt.rush-limbaugh,
sci.geo.meteorology are you a troll?

Marvin the Martian

unread,
Mar 19, 2012, 9:21:32 PM3/19/12
to
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:40:30 -0400, Leonard wrote:

> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
> <TITLE>Re: Global Climate Change </TITLE> </HEAD>

Microsoft doesn't know that the usenet exist. Get another reader - on
most usenet readers your posts come out as unreadable HTML garbage.

Don't bother replying - you've just been added to the killfile.

gordo

unread,
Mar 20, 2012, 1:51:22 PM3/20/12
to
Well we agree on something he needs a different usenet reader. He is
wasting his posts here but what the hell when you actually read what
he writes it is not worth reading anyway.

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 20, 2012, 10:34:18 PM3/20/12
to
where is mount Chimborazo?

is its trees being cut?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 21, 2012, 9:28:56 AM3/21/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 22, 2012, 1:47:44 AM3/22/12
to
bump this thread to the top of the group.

Leonard

unread,
Mar 22, 2012, 6:05:08 PM3/22/12
to
That is your loss

        ø You are the only one complaining
            I’ve been in usenet for decades and
            get several hundred hits every week.


           Check your own reader.
            

Bill Ward

unread,
Mar 22, 2012, 7:49:38 PM3/22/12
to
Maybe everyone has given up on you. Your posts have an annoying html
appendage, which does not meet Usenet specs (ASCII only). See if you
can't find an option to omit the html. That won't guarantee anyone will
read your posts, but it can't hurt.
>
>
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
> <TITLE>Re: Global Climate Change</TITLE> </HEAD>
> <BODY>
> <FONT FACE="Baskerville Old Face"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14.0px'>On
> 3/19/12 9:21 PM, in article
> jJOdnbHChJsBRvrS...@giganews.com, &quot;Marvin the
> Martian&quot; &lt;mar...@ontomars.org&gt; wrote:<BR> <BR>
> </SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Baskerville Old Face"><SPAN
> STYLE='font-size:14.0px'>On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:40:30 -0400, Leonard
> wrote:<BR> <BR>
> &gt; &lt;HTML&gt;<BR>
> &gt; &lt;HEAD&gt;<BR>
> &gt; &lt;TITLE&gt;Re: Global Climate Change &lt;/TITLE&gt;
> &lt;/HEAD&gt;<BR> <BR>
> Microsoft doesn't know that the usenet exist. Get another reader - on
> <BR> most usenet readers your posts come out as unreadable HTML garbage.
> <BR> <BR>
> Don't bother replying - you've just been added to the killfile. <BR>
> That is your loss<BR>
> </SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Baskerville Old Face"><SPAN
> STYLE='font-size:14.0px'><BR>
> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&oslash; You are the
> only one complaining<BR>
>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I&#8217;ve
> been in usenet for decades and <BR>
>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;get
> several hundred hits every week.<BR> <BR>
> <BR>
> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Check
> your own reader.<BR>
>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<BR>
> </SPAN></FONT>
> </BODY>
> </HTML>

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 23, 2012, 8:59:25 AM3/23/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bumping this thread to the top of the group

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 24, 2012, 5:49:12 PM3/24/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

Wally W.

unread,
Mar 24, 2012, 7:06:40 PM3/24/12
to
Only if viewed in Google groups or with your settings in Firefox.

If one has posts sorted by thread, your effort only shows up as a new
but content-free post in an old thread. It doesn't move that thread to
the top of anything.

Have you learned what top posting means yet?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/about
Top posters
All time
11000 columbiaaccidentinvestigation

Too funny.

11,000 posts in and he doesn't seem to know either of the two facts
mentioned above.

A noob would know both.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 25, 2012, 12:13:43 AM3/25/12
to
On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 14:49:12 -0700 (PDT),

So lets scan some recent history, ah here we go, here is an example of
when i posted a quote you asked for you, didnt quite respond to the
true content of thomas jeffersons words. Nope instead you acted like
an idiot as usual, now maybe i wouldnt need to post in such high
quantity if you denialsts didnt choose to act with such belligerence
and idiocy.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/63f901b99769224a

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 9:27:03 AM3/26/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thread to the top of the group

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 2:38:37 PM3/26/12
to
is it true, this only works within the googolplex front-end?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 2:46:28 PM3/26/12
to
> On Mar 26, 11:38 am,

bumping this thread up to the top of the group

> 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com> wrote:

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 2:47:01 PM3/26/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 2:36:07 PM3/26/12
to
I don't see the HTML on the googolplex front-end, but
his massive "sigfile" of the same old ****, with every posting,
ia quite annoying.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 5:36:41 PM3/26/12
to
> On Mar 26, 11:36 am

Global Climate Change - NASA
climate.nasa.gov/

cross posted to (talk.politics.misc, sci.physics, alt.rush-limbaugh,
sci.geo.meteorology)?

> quite annoying.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 26, 2012, 6:03:54 PM3/26/12
to
On Mar 26, 6:27 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 27, 2012, 1:03:19 PM3/27/12
to
roger that.

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 27, 2012, 1:02:40 PM3/27/12
to
idiot; I just did it!... so, is it true,
that it only applies to the googolplex front-end,
that I am using?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 27, 2012, 6:01:38 PM3/27/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

Global Climate Change - NASA
climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thread to the top of the group

Wally W.

unread,
Mar 28, 2012, 1:06:24 AM3/28/12
to
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:38:37 -0700 (PDT), 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:

>is it true, this only works within the googolplex front-end?
>
>> bump this thread to the top of the group

He has *posted* 11,000 times.

That doesn't mean he has *learned* as much about how usenet works as a
noob might in 100 interactive posts.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 28, 2012, 1:43:22 AM3/28/12
to
On Mar 27, 9:06 pm, Wally W. <ww8...@aim.com> wrote:"" snip

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 28, 2012, 10:51:32 PM3/28/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

bump this thread to the top of the group

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 11:10:57 AM3/29/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 1:20:33 PM3/29/12
to
bump what thread to the top of what group?

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 1:22:32 PM3/29/12
to
welcome to the astrodrome!

> http::/
climate.
nasa.
gov
/

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 1:20:04 PM3/29/12
to
no,no,no> bump this thread to the top of the group

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 1:20:59 PM3/29/12
to
it's all, like, bumpy in hrere

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 29, 2012, 1:44:27 PM3/29/12
to
On Mar 29, 10:20 am,

Global Climate Change - NASA
climate.nasa.gov/



columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 30, 2012, 9:20:18 AM3/30/12
to
On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Mar 30, 2012, 10:07:40 PM3/30/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

curiousd

unread,
Mar 31, 2012, 3:37:45 AM3/31/12
to
On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 1:16:51 AM UTC-5, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
> Global Climate Change - NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

Thank you for the useful post. I am a newbie and it is good to see nice data unaccompanied by politics.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 1, 2012, 9:38:29 AM4/1/12
to
you are welcome.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 4, 2012, 2:40:43 PM4/4/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 6, 2012, 2:20:24 AM4/6/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 7, 2012, 11:43:04 PM4/7/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 9, 2012, 9:21:59 AM4/9/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 9, 2012, 9:05:04 PM4/9/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 10, 2012, 9:10:40 AM4/10/12
to

Falcon

unread,
Apr 10, 2012, 9:32:58 AM4/10/12
to
In article <68407c93-760b-49d8...@v22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote...
I

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 10, 2012, 9:51:17 AM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 6:10 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 11, 2012, 9:11:17 AM4/11/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 12, 2012, 8:59:11 AM4/12/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 13, 2012, 8:54:11 AM4/13/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 15, 2012, 3:28:39 PM4/15/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 16, 2012, 12:26:27 PM4/16/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 17, 2012, 1:49:24 AM4/17/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 17, 2012, 9:28:38 PM4/17/12
to

1treePetrifiedForestLane

unread,
Apr 17, 2012, 10:03:48 PM4/17/12
to
yawn -- wakr-up & smell the posies!

> climate.nasa.gov/

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 23, 2012, 9:04:54 AM4/23/12
to
On Apr 17, 6:28 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
Apr 24, 2012, 9:12:15 PM4/24/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 1, 2012, 8:56:47 AM5/1/12
to
On Apr 10, 6:51 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 2, 2012, 5:35:25 PM5/2/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Global Climate Change -NASA
> climate.nasa.gov/

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 3, 2012, 9:06:37 AM5/3/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 3, 2012, 8:12:52 PM5/3/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 4, 2012, 8:27:48 AM5/4/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 5, 2012, 1:23:11 AM5/5/12
to

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 6, 2012, 8:41:02 PM5/6/12
to
On Mar 7, 6:57 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>
> bump this thread to the top of the group.

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 7, 2012, 9:05:01 AM5/7/12
to
On Mar 17, 10:30 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 10, 2012, 9:11:18 AM5/10/12
to
On Mar 12, 6:43 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 12, 5:41 am, Falcon <fal...@invalid.net> wrote:snip
>
> not much to say?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 11, 2012, 6:33:59 PM5/11/12
to
On Mar 13, 1:13 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>
> bump this thread up to the top

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 14, 2012, 8:49:44 AM5/14/12
to
On Mar 17, 10:30 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>
> bump this thread to the top of the group

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 15, 2012, 11:07:32 AM5/15/12
to
On May 14, 5:49 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 16, 2012, 1:26:57 AM5/16/12
to
On Mar 26, 11:47 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 11:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>

columbiaaccidentinvestigation

unread,
May 17, 2012, 1:14:51 AM5/17/12
to
On Mar 17, 10:30 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 10:16 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Global Climate Change - NASA
> > climate.nasa.gov/
>
> bump this thread to the top of the group

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages