Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
I Am A "Climate Denier" There Are Too Many "Climate :Liars"
9 views
Skip to first unread message
Tracey12
Mar 30, 2013, 4:38:45 PM3/30/13
to
Yes, it is true. I do not believe the earth is heating up.
A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
warming whatsoever.
Don't believe the Climate Liars.
A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
warming whatsoever.
Don't believe the Climate Liars.
Gordon
Mar 30, 2013, 4:53:56 PM3/30/13
to
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 13:38:45 -0700 (PDT), Tracey12
<tracey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yes, it is true. I do not believe the earth is heating up.
>
Actually, the year around ice in the Great Lakes melted away about
<tracey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yes, it is true. I do not believe the earth is heating up.
>
12,000 years ago and the polar ice caps have been retreating since
then. The last period of glaciation bottomed out about 20,000 years
ago then things remained rather stable for another 8,000 years. Then,
about 12,000 years ago this ongoing period of interglacial warming has
been making progress. It isn't a smooth up-ramp. Instead it is a
series of spurts and dips that may seem stable for several years then
suddenly make another quick move, either up or down.
>
>A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
>other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
>concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
>They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
>instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
>to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
>
Think of this interglacial warming process as moving along steady by
>A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
>other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
>concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
>They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
>instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
>to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
>
jerks, like a toad walking.
>
>They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
>that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
>This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
>rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
>
>Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
>believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
>warming whatsoever.
>
There is no rational way all this present interglacial warming trend
>They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
>that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
>This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
>rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
>
>Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
>believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
>warming whatsoever.
>
could be blamed on humans. The human effect today is probably about
like a butterfly flapping its wings in Malaysia causing a storm in
Alaska.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 30, 2013, 5:27:48 PM3/30/13
to
Tracey12 <tracey...@gmail.com> wrote in news:8ae27e07-fb73-4b4a-950d-
ad4120...@v8g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
Your Great Leader.....Lied?
"First of all, the globe IS warming"
George Bush, March 29, 2006
"I recognise the surface of the earth is warmer and
that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans
is contributing to the problem,"
George Bush, July 7 2005
ad4120...@v8g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
"First of all, the globe IS warming"
George Bush, March 29, 2006
"I recognise the surface of the earth is warmer and
that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans
is contributing to the problem,"
George Bush, July 7 2005
Gordon
Mar 30, 2013, 6:38:37 PM3/30/13
to
turf and tilled the soil for the past few centuries. This has resulted
in a lot more soil/clay etc. being washed down the rivers into the
ocean where it eventually settles to the bottom and seals lots of
hydrocarbon stuff beneath it. This sequestered carbon residue might
actually be reducing the global warming by removing so much carbon
from the atmosphere and sequestering it on the ocean floor. Gordon
Suzanne Catherine Mize
Mar 30, 2013, 8:55:43 PM3/30/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 22:54:01 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>Tracey12 <tracey...@gmail.com> wrote in news:241129d6-4d6f-406c-a326-
>1f7440...@u1g2000yql.googlegroups.com:
>> We are in the midst of a left wing political orgasm as the extremists
>> try to ban guns,
> Every gun restriction is "banning guns", right?
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He said "try to ban guns" as in:
Dianne Feinstein Introduces Assault Weapons Ban, Urges Public To Help
It Pass 01/24/2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-ban_n_2541743.html
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 22:54:01 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>Tracey12 <tracey...@gmail.com> wrote in news:241129d6-4d6f-406c-a326-
>1f7440...@u1g2000yql.googlegroups.com:
>> We are in the midst of a left wing political orgasm as the extremists
>> try to ban guns,
> Every gun restriction is "banning guns", right?
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He said "try to ban guns" as in:
Dianne Feinstein Introduces Assault Weapons Ban, Urges Public To Help
It Pass 01/24/2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-ban_n_2541743.html
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Message has been deleted
Natalia Lea
Mar 30, 2013, 9:57:55 PM3/30/13
to
Yoorghis: Real name Gary Richard Roselles. Before he was exposed he
changed his name every few days or weeks mainly because he's a
sociopathic coward, a pussy, and above all else a LIAR and a
time-waster. Gary is another example of a Complete Loser: He is
festering away in a one-bedroom apartment on Medicaid and Social
Security having wasted his entire life... (And he never served in the
US military...)
Gary uses "X-No-Archive: yes" in his message Header to force
server-side deletion of ALL of his posts and this is usually the only
way to detect his presence (unless you detect the strong odor of
shit).
Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
Gary Richard Roselles (DoB: 11/1942)
(Diane M Roselles)
4215 Cedar Ridge Pl, Apt 42
Rapid City, SD 57702-3190
(605) 341-2445
Gary's real Email: rose...@yahoo.com
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:54:27 -0700, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>Why do you think that AssChroft was hired as AG---he was in the middle
>of suing he govt for forceing his state to integrate public schools.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ashcroft was elected governor in 1984 and re-elected in 1988, becoming
the first (and, to date, the only) Republican in Missouri history
elected to two consecutive terms. In 1994 Ashcroft was elected to the
U.S. Senate from Missouri... In December 2000, following his
Senatorial defeat, Ashcroft was chosen for the position of U.S.
attorney general by president-elect George W. Bush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft
changed his name every few days or weeks mainly because he's a
sociopathic coward, a pussy, and above all else a LIAR and a
time-waster. Gary is another example of a Complete Loser: He is
festering away in a one-bedroom apartment on Medicaid and Social
Security having wasted his entire life... (And he never served in the
US military...)
Gary uses "X-No-Archive: yes" in his message Header to force
server-side deletion of ALL of his posts and this is usually the only
way to detect his presence (unless you detect the strong odor of
shit).
Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
(Diane M Roselles)
4215 Cedar Ridge Pl, Apt 42
Rapid City, SD 57702-3190
(605) 341-2445
Gary's real Email: rose...@yahoo.com
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
>Why do you think that AssChroft was hired as AG---he was in the middle
>of suing he govt for forceing his state to integrate public schools.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ashcroft was elected governor in 1984 and re-elected in 1988, becoming
the first (and, to date, the only) Republican in Missouri history
elected to two consecutive terms. In 1994 Ashcroft was elected to the
U.S. Senate from Missouri... In December 2000, following his
Senatorial defeat, Ashcroft was chosen for the position of U.S.
attorney general by president-elect George W. Bush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft
Mike Smith
Mar 30, 2013, 11:23:25 PM3/30/13
to
politicians.
Mike Smith
•RLMeasures
Mar 31, 2013, 12:04:33 AM3/31/13
to
In article <nvafl89oc8ern1bh6...@4ax.com>, Mike Smith
• The Summer of 2012 was the hottest on record but that was because all
weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 12:08:55 AM3/31/13
to
Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in news:nvafl89oc8ern1bh6s66q16utvtlfbei1c@
4ax.com:
Or Bush was a manifest idiot that no one
but a Republican would vote for. Twice.......
"I heard somebody say, 'Where's Nelson Mandela?' Well,
Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas."
George W. Bush, on the former South African president who
is still very much alive, Sept. 20, 2007
4ax.com:
but a Republican would vote for. Twice.......
"I heard somebody say, 'Where's Nelson Mandela?' Well,
Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas."
George W. Bush, on the former South African president who
is still very much alive, Sept. 20, 2007
Doretha Wilt
Mar 31, 2013, 12:34:50 AM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
Mitchell Holman <nom...@comcast.net>|204.99.118.9Scottsdale, AZHost:
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
rs118ws9.advancepcs.comIP: 204.99.118.9advancepcs.comPCS Health
Systems PCSHLTH (NET-204-99-0-0-2)204.99.0.0 -
204.99.127.255http://ip.robtex.com/204.99.118.9.html#whoisPCS Health
Systems Inc. was acquired by Advance Paradigm Inc. on 10/03/2000. PCS
Health Systems was a pharmacy benefits management company.9501 E. Shea
BoulevardScottsdale, AZ 85260Mitchell V Holman (Lives with Melvin V
Holman BoD August 1953, James H Holman)
10268 S Del Rey Dr
Yuma, AZ 85367
(928) 342-0330 (Melvin Holman)
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 6:35:37 AM3/31/13
to
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 23:08:55 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Thanks for posting another example of just how stupid libtards can be.
You have exhibited numerous idiotic tendencies in your posts, so you
do know the requirements for being an idiot, however you are wrong,
again.
Mike Smith
You have exhibited numerous idiotic tendencies in your posts, so you
do know the requirements for being an idiot, however you are wrong,
again.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 6:46:10 AM3/31/13
to
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the
expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.
Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface
temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range
projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat,
they will fall outside the models' range within a few years.
"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are
diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global
Warming Policy Foundation.
and
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
warming has been massively overestimated. Yet those forecasts have had
a ruinous impact on the bills we pay, from heating to car fuel to huge
sums paid by councils to reduce carbon emissions.
The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
no emissions targets.
Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
look bad.
Mike Smith
Message has been deleted
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 8:40:31 AM3/31/13
to
headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
glaciation. Gordon
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 9:00:10 AM3/31/13
to
Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
As I understand it we are actually overdue
for another ice age, one that has been delayed
by the current round of global warming.
news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
for another ice age, one that has been delayed
by the current round of global warming.
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 9:12:48 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:10 -0500, Mitchell Holman
This seems to be the rational assessment of all the ice core data that
shows previous periods of glaciation/interglacial warmings. I do think
we would have already started back down that slope into a period of
glaciation back in the late 1800s had it not been for the bit of delay
caused by human induced atmospheric pollution. Gordon
shows previous periods of glaciation/interglacial warmings. I do think
we would have already started back down that slope into a period of
glaciation back in the late 1800s had it not been for the bit of delay
caused by human induced atmospheric pollution. Gordon
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 9:22:23 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
wrote:
It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
Mike Smith
wrote:
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 9:25:14 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:12:48 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
wrote:
Bullshit.
Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
planetary weather.
Mike Smith
wrote:
Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
planetary weather.
Mike Smith
Kenny McCormack
Mar 31, 2013, 9:38:52 AM3/31/13
to
In article <20130331024748.330$D...@newsreader.com>,
Denny <dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
...
(some lunatic wrote)
>Why would you believe the right wing dingbats rather thatn the scientists?
People tend to trust their own kind.
--
A liberal, a moderate, and a conservative walk into a bar...
Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!"
Denny <dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
...
(some lunatic wrote)
>> Don't believe the Climate Liars.
(you responded)
>Why would you believe the right wing dingbats rather thatn the scientists?
People tend to trust their own kind.
--
A liberal, a moderate, and a conservative walk into a bar...
Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!"
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 9:48:33 AM3/31/13
to
Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in
news:j4egl893h24o5aj1r...@4ax.com:
http://climate.nasa.gov/
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 10:10:56 AM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
....
that states that precisely, with data to support it..
>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
>>> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
>>> warming has been massively overestimated
Nope.. Try and find and find an actual peer-reviewed paper
that states that precisely, with data to support it..
>>> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>> no emissions targets.
>>>
>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>> look bad.
>>
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures which seek to resemble ideas"
-Lionel Trilling
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>
....
>>>> The Summer of 2012 was the hottest on record but that was because all
>>>> weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
>>>
>>> Here ya go, dumbass. Try to educate yourself.
>>>
>>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
>>>
>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the
>>> expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.
Nope.. Try and find and find an actual peer-reviewed paper
>>>> weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
>>>
>>> Here ya go, dumbass. Try to educate yourself.
>>>
>>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
>>>
>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the
>>> expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.
that states that precisely, with data to support it..
>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
>>> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
>>> warming has been massively overestimated
that states that precisely, with data to support it..
>>> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>> no emissions targets.
>>>
>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>> look bad.
>>
>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> glaciation. Gordon
>
> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> glaciation. Gordon
>
> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures which seek to resemble ideas"
-Lionel Trilling
Kenny McCormack
Mar 31, 2013, 10:52:44 AM3/31/13
to
In article <XnsA194594695B87...@216.196.121.131>,
...
they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
Sadly, there's little chance of this ever happening.
--
"That's the eternal flame."[7] The single became another worldwide hit.[8]
Hoffs was actually naked when she recorded the song, after being convinced
by Sigerson that Olivia Newton-John got her amazing performances by
recording everything while naked.[9]
(From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bangles)
...
>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>> planetary weather.
>
>
> The experts disagree with you.
>
>http://climate.nasa.gov/
If Conservaloons listened to experts, there'd be a whole bunch of things
>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>> planetary weather.
>
>
> The experts disagree with you.
>
>http://climate.nasa.gov/
they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
Sadly, there's little chance of this ever happening.
--
"That's the eternal flame."[7] The single became another worldwide hit.[8]
Hoffs was actually naked when she recorded the song, after being convinced
by Sigerson that Olivia Newton-John got her amazing performances by
recording everything while naked.[9]
(From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bangles)
•RLMeasures
Mar 31, 2013, 10:58:11 AM3/31/13
to
In article <8h4gl89lt9tmnb0vs...@4ax.com>, Mike Smith
• there was no standstill in the Summer of 2012. Our air conditioner
worked overtime well into Fall. In 2011 we did not turn it on.
>shows that climate models are
> diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global
> Warming Policy Foundation.
>
> and
>
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
> warming has been massively overestimated. Yet those forecasts have had
> a ruinous impact on the bills we pay, from heating to car fuel to huge
> sums paid by councils to reduce carbon emissions.
>
> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
> no emissions targets.
• Did the US ever sign the treaty on global warming"
strikes deep.
>
> Mike Smith
worked overtime well into Fall. In 2011 we did not turn it on.
>shows that climate models are
> diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global
> Warming Policy Foundation.
>
> and
>
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
> warming has been massively overestimated. Yet those forecasts have had
> a ruinous impact on the bills we pay, from heating to car fuel to huge
> sums paid by councils to reduce carbon emissions.
>
> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
> no emissions targets.
>
>
> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
> look bad.
• chortle. Conspiracies to the right, conspiracies to the left, paranoia
>
> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
> look bad.
strikes deep.
>
> Mike Smith
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 11:47:48 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:25:14 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:12:48 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:10 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>><nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>>>news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>>
<snip>
>On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:12:48 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:10 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>><nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>>>news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As I understand it we are actually overdue
>>>for another ice age, one that has been delayed
>>>by the current round of global warming.
>>>
>>This seems to be the rational assessment of all the ice core data that
>>shows previous periods of glaciation/interglacial warmings. I do think
>>we would have already started back down that slope into a period of
>>glaciation back in the late 1800s had it not been for the bit of delay
>>caused by human induced atmospheric pollution. Gordon
>
>Bullshit.
>
>Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>planetary weather.
>
>Mike Smith
>
Humans don't have to be the DOMINANT influence, but their tiny bit of
influence could tip the scale, so to speak. What I'm saying is that
human induced atmospheric pollution may have extended the present
interglacial warm period for a few hundred years. A few hundred years
out of 12,000 years isn't really very much.
The humongous amount of paved streets, parking lots and sidewalks
along with all the asphalt roofs do capture a lot more of the sun's
energy. This energy might have been absorbed into plants or it might
have been reflected back into space from snow and ice had these human
structures not existed.
Some of the residue from plant life that captures solar energy and
converts it into a form of carbon may get washed down the rivers into
the ocean where it then settles to the bottom and is covered with clay
particles that also washed from our agricultural areas down the
rivers. Some or most of this could become sequestered and taken out of
the global warming cycle. Who knows what the net balance would be???
Gordon
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 11:52:47 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:52:44 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com
(Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>In article <XnsA194594695B87...@216.196.121.131>,
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in
>...
>>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>>> planetary weather.
>>
>>
>> The experts disagree with you.
>>
>>http://climate.nasa.gov/
>
>If Conservaloons listened to experts, there'd be a whole bunch of things
>they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
>Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
>
God's time frame or ours? The 5kyo Earth seems not to fit into our
(Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>In article <XnsA194594695B87...@216.196.121.131>,
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in
>...
>>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>>> planetary weather.
>>
>>
>> The experts disagree with you.
>>
>>http://climate.nasa.gov/
>
>If Conservaloons listened to experts, there'd be a whole bunch of things
>they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
>Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
>
time frame and the geological evidence we have "unearthed" but we have
no such information as to God's time frame, therefore we are not yet
able to "prove" that this doesn't all fit neatly into God's time
frame. God does operate outside our time frame. Our time frame began
with the Big Bang that God initiated to create the Heavens
(multiverse) and the Earth (this space/time universe we are able to
perceive.)
A day is as a thousand years and a thousand years are as a day.
Gordon
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 11:53:30 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:48:33 -0500, Mitchell Holman
No they don't, you fool...
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
Mike Smith
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 11:54:29 AM3/31/13
to
>In article <XnsA194594695B87...@216.196.121.131>,
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in
>...
>>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>>> planetary weather.
>>
>>
>> The experts disagree with you.
>>
>>http://climate.nasa.gov/
>
>If Conservaloons listened to experts, there'd be a whole bunch of things
>they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
>Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
>
>Sadly, there's little chance of this ever happening.
If libtards even grabbed a clue about their mythical "experts", they
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in
>...
>>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>>> planetary weather.
>>
>>
>> The experts disagree with you.
>>
>>http://climate.nasa.gov/
>
>If Conservaloons listened to experts, there'd be a whole bunch of things
>they'd no longer believe, such as the 6Kyo Earth, Virgin Birth, welfare
>Cadillacs, that guns enhance home safety, etc, etc.
>
>Sadly, there's little chance of this ever happening.
would not be libtards.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 11:57:02 AM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>....
>>>>> The Summer of 2012 was the hottest on record but that was because all
>>>>> weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
>>>>
>>>> Here ya go, dumbass. Try to educate yourself.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
>>>>
>>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the
>>>> expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>....
>>>>> The Summer of 2012 was the hottest on record but that was because all
>>>>> weathermen are stupid mo-fo Libtards.
>>>>
>>>> Here ya go, dumbass. Try to educate yourself.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
>>>>
>>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the
>>>> expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.
>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
>>>> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
>>>> warming has been massively overestimated
>>>> The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global
>>>> warming has been massively overestimated
>>>> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
>>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>>> no emissions targets.
>>>>
>>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>>> look bad.
>>>
>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>
>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>
>Nope, that's been debunked for years..
Yes folks, libtards ARE this stupid. They actually believe the Sun
>>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>>> no emissions targets.
>>>>
>>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>>> look bad.
>>>
>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>
>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>
>Nope, that's been debunked for years..
does not control our planet's weather.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Mar 31, 2013, 11:59:46 AM3/31/13
to
On 31 Mar 2013 06:47:48 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>Tracey12 <tracey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, it is true. I do not believe the earth is heating up.
>>
>> A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
>> other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
>> concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
>> They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
>> instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
>> to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
>>
>> They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
>> that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
>> This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
>> rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
>>
>> Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
>> believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
>> warming whatsoever.
>>
>> Don't believe the Climate Liars.
>
report.
Why do you believe 150 scientists that have fed you bad data?
Mike Smith
>Tracey12 <tracey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, it is true. I do not believe the earth is heating up.
>>
>> A couple of years ago, UN scientists where sending emails to each
>> other that got revealed to the public. In those emails were the
>> concerns of UN scientists who said that the earth was not warming.
>> They were upset because their models showed warming, but the
>> instruments in the field did not show warming. They didn't know what
>> to do because of the conflict between reality and their models.
>>
>> They had told the public that the earth is warming up. We now know
>> that for 20 years, there have been no indications of any warming.
>> This goes against the desires of socialists who want more government
>> rules and regulations to control the lives of Americans.
>>
>> Ther4 are far too many Climate Liars involved in all of this to
>> believe that citizens are reponsible for any warming, and there is no
>> warming whatsoever.
>>
>> Don't believe the Climate Liars.
>
>Why would you believe the right wing dingbats rather thatn the scientists?
31,000 scientists disagree with the 150 scientists that wrote the IPCC
report.
Why do you believe 150 scientists that have fed you bad data?
Mike Smith
Message has been deleted
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 12:41:02 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/30/13 11:08 PM, in article
XnsA193EB2448458...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l41U8YoFvwA>
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 12:45:00 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 5:46 AM, in article 8h4gl89lt9tmnb0vs...@4ax.com,
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=L1DgYMYVaUE>
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 12:47:26 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:00 AM, in article
XnsA19451121FDAD...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 1:04:26 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:25 AM, in article j4egl893h24o5aj1r...@4ax.com,
Oh, wait! Al (the whale) Gore has just allotted me a few "Carbon Credits" -
I'm off to gets some frijoles, now! YEA!!!
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 1:06:46 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:38 AM, in article kj9e9c$g8s$1...@news.xmission.com, "Kenny
McCormack" <gaz...@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
> In article <20130331024748.330$D...@newsreader.com>,
> Denny <dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> (some lunatic wrote)
>>> Don't believe the Climate Liars.
> (you responded)
>> Why would you believe the right wing dingbats rather thatn the scientists?
>
> People tend to trust their own kind.
Correcting your idiotic sig line:
> In article <20130331024748.330$D...@newsreader.com>,
> Denny <dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> (some lunatic wrote)
>>> Don't believe the Climate Liars.
> (you responded)
>> Why would you believe the right wing dingbats rather thatn the scientists?
>
> People tend to trust their own kind.
An illegal alien, a Communist, and a Muslim walked into a bar, and the
bartender said.... "Hello there, Mr. President!"
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 1:10:38 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:48 AM, in article
XnsA194594695B87...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
year, at 15.13 million square kilometers (5.84 million square miles)."
From your above URL
Care to explain why there is MORE ice now than ever before? HMMM?!?
Message has been deleted
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 1:29:13 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 12:19 PM, in article 20130331131911.121$g...@newsreader.com,
"Denny" <dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
> should check it out.
Yeah. Great laffs! That Gore guy really cracks me up. We should all get
together and get him a new plane, ya' know?!?
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2637593/posts>
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 2:14:30 PM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 12:04:26 -0500, George Kerby
<ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 3/31/13 8:25 AM, in article j4egl893h24o5aj1r...@4ax.com,
>"Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:12:48 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:10 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>>>> news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>>>
<snip>
<ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 3/31/13 8:25 AM, in article j4egl893h24o5aj1r...@4ax.com,
>"Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:12:48 -0500, Gordon <gord...@swbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:00:10 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>>>> news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This seems to be the rational assessment of all the ice core data that
>>> shows previous periods of glaciation/interglacial warmings. I do think
>>> we would have already started back down that slope into a period of
>>> glaciation back in the late 1800s had it not been for the bit of delay
>>> caused by human induced atmospheric pollution. Gordon
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>> planetary weather.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
>Libtards need to worry more about cow farts.
>
>Oh, wait! Al (the whale) Gore has just allotted me a few "Carbon Credits" -
>I'm off to gets some frijoles, now! YEA!!!
>
You do realize, do you not, that bovines don't produce methane by
>>> This seems to be the rational assessment of all the ice core data that
>>> shows previous periods of glaciation/interglacial warmings. I do think
>>> we would have already started back down that slope into a period of
>>> glaciation back in the late 1800s had it not been for the bit of delay
>>> caused by human induced atmospheric pollution. Gordon
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>> Man does not have that capability. We cannot regulate the Sun, nor can
>> we change our weather. The miniscule amounts of air pollution put into
>> our atmosphere by human activity have no measurable effect on our
>> planetary weather.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
>Libtards need to worry more about cow farts.
>
>Oh, wait! Al (the whale) Gore has just allotted me a few "Carbon Credits" -
>I'm off to gets some frijoles, now! YEA!!!
>
farting. They produce methane by belching and they belch to retrieve
some roughage from their rumen that they had chewed and swallowed a
few hours earlier. It's part of their ordinary digestion process.
Gordon
Gordon
Mar 31, 2013, 2:19:31 PM3/31/13
to
On 31 Mar 2013 17:16:59 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>> Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>> news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>
>> > On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>In article <nvafl89oc8ern1bh6...@4ax.com>, Mike Smith
>> >>><m...@wt.net> wrote:
<snip>
>cooler tempratures.
>
And, what causes the cooler temperatures? I think it is the result of
solar pulsations that might be compared to a heart beat. That is, the
sun has a heart beat pulsation about every 112,000 years. When this
pulsation reaches its peak the sun puts out more light/heat and the
earth warms up. This usually goes on for about 12,000 years then the
sun's pulsation slowly recedes to the quiescent level for another
97,000 years or so. Gordon
>Mitchell Holman <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>> Gordon <gord...@swbell.net> wrote in
>> news:sibgl8t3uu9gk3kne...@4ax.com:
>>
>> > On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>In article <nvafl89oc8ern1bh6...@4ax.com>, Mike Smith
>> >>><m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> > Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>> > headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> > glaciation. Gordon
>> >
>>
>> As I understand it we are actually overdue
>> for another ice age, one that has been delayed
>> by the current round of global warming.
>
>Ice ages don't happen because it's their turn. They happen becouse of
>> > Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>> > headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> > glaciation. Gordon
>> >
>>
>> As I understand it we are actually overdue
>> for another ice age, one that has been delayed
>> by the current round of global warming.
>
>cooler tempratures.
>
And, what causes the cooler temperatures? I think it is the result of
solar pulsations that might be compared to a heart beat. That is, the
sun has a heart beat pulsation about every 112,000 years. When this
pulsation reaches its peak the sun puts out more light/heat and the
earth warms up. This usually goes on for about 12,000 years then the
sun's pulsation slowly recedes to the quiescent level for another
97,000 years or so. Gordon
George Kerby
Mar 31, 2013, 2:40:29 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/13 1:14 PM, in article o2vgl85aicggqtb77...@4ax.com,
colorful and feel-goodie as my presentation, which is what it is all about
to the typical 'progressive'.
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 4:45:40 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 10:57 AM, Mike Smith deleted and bleated:
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind restored:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining at:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon replied:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
.....
> They actually believe the Sun does not control our planet's weather.
That's been debunked, and deleting my cites doesn't change
the facts that I refuted you with, you fueless cluck..
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind restored:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining at:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon replied:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
.....
>>>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>>>> look bad.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>
>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>
>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>
> Yes folks, libtards ARE this stupid
Demonizing your opponent won't help you, you fueless cluck..
>>>>> look bad.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>
>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>
>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>
> Yes folks, libtards ARE this stupid
> They actually believe the Sun does not control our planet's weather.
the facts that I refuted you with, you fueless cluck..
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 6:46:45 PM3/31/13
to
George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:CD7DD83E.9971C%ghost_...@hotmail.com:
And the current maximum extent is smaller
than last years maximum extent. That means
gradual shrinking.
"Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has
declined rapidly over the last several decades."
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
news:CD7DD83E.9971C%ghost_...@hotmail.com:
than last years maximum extent. That means
gradual shrinking.
"Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has
declined rapidly over the last several decades."
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 7:12:51 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 4:14 PM, Flea Blurtus whined impetuously:
>
> Man of Mind noted the evasions presented by:
Wrong, flapsjaw aka faulty sham..
> Good lord, but you are one f** [..]
I see that you again couldn't refute my cites..
Care to try again, little right-wing zealot?
>
> Man of Mind noted the evasions presented by:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 10:57 AM, Mike Smith deleted and bleated:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining at:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon replied:
.....
>> On 3/31/2013 10:57 AM, Mike Smith deleted and bleated:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining at:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon replied:
>>>>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>>>
>>>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>
>>> Yes folks, libtards [..]
>>>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>>>
>>>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>
>>
>> Demonizing your opponent won't help you, you fueless cluck..
>>
>>> They actually believe the Sun does not control our planet's weather.
>>
>> That's been debunked, and deleting my cites doesn't change
>> the facts that I refuted you with, you fueless cluck..
>
> Oh my, Mike Smith was
>> Demonizing your opponent won't help you, you fueless cluck..
>>
>>> They actually believe the Sun does not control our planet's weather.
>>
>> That's been debunked, and deleting my cites doesn't change
>> the facts that I refuted you with, you fueless cluck..
>
Wrong, flapsjaw aka faulty sham..
> Good lord, but you are one f** [..]
I see that you again couldn't refute my cites..
Care to try again, little right-wing zealot?
Day Brown
Mar 31, 2013, 7:43:37 PM3/31/13
to
you are not a gardener or farmer are you. We know the growing season is longer now, that the frost does not penetrate the ground as much, so more bugs survive the winters. I also see prickly pear, yucca, armadillo, and roadrunner up in my neck of Ozark woods from TX. But dont be confused by the facts.
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 7:58:59 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>
> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
..
>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS BASED ON
>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>
> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past 15 or
> so years?
Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES ALL
>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>> FACT.
>
> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
..
>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS BASED ON
>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>
> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past 15 or
> so years?
Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES ALL
>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>> FACT.
>
> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
Orval Fairbairn
Mar 31, 2013, 8:07:50 PM3/31/13
to
In article <a466ff74-3516-4692...@googlegroups.com>,
We also "know" that we cannot expect any accumulation of snow in the
CONUS after about March 1, don't we?
CONUS after about March 1, don't we?
Jerry Shanon Ackerman
Mar 31, 2013, 9:12:34 PM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
"Mitchell Holman" <Noemai...@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A0768469...@216.196.97.131...
> "Patriot Games" <Pat...@America.com> wrote in news:4763f659"0"4990
> "4c36...@roadrunner.com:
>> "Governor Swill" <governo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:tjs6m3dllv6opc82f...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:40:13 -0500, "Patriot Games"
>>> <Pat...@America.com> wrote:
>>>>> A "Family Values" whoremonger. Oh, the irony.......
>>>>>> Barney is a pervert protected by Democrats.
>>>>> What was he ever convicted of?
>>>>Nothing that I can think of.
>>>>Being protected by Democrats can come in very handy.
>>> What should he be convicted of?
>> He was allowing a male prostitution ring to be headquartered in his home.
> No arrest, no trial, no conviction. Do explain.
You'd have to ask the local police.
>> That should have been enough for the Senate Ethics Committee to boot him.
> The GOP ran the Senate Ethics Committee for 12 years
> and took no action on this "crime".
Caught LYING, again.
"Frank, one of two openly gay members of Congress, confirmed Friday
that he paid Gobie for sex, hired him with personal funds as an aide
and wrote letters on congressional stationery on his behalf to
Virginia probation officials, but Frank said he fired Gobie when he
learned that clients were visiting the apartment."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/tours/scandal/gobie2.htm
Formal Reprimand of Rep. Frank Is Urged by House's Ethics Panel
July 20, 1990
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD81731F933A15754C0A966958260
IN THE MATTER OF REPRESENT- ATIVE BARNEY FRANK (House of
Representatives July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:17:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURES OF BARNEY FRANK -- HON.
HENRY A. WAXMAN (Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:10:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
EXPLANATION OF AGENDA FOR DEBATE IN THE MATTER OF REPRESENTATIVE
BARNEY FRANK (House of Representatives - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:9:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE REPRIMAND OF CONGRESSMAN BARNEY FRANK -- HON. JERRY F. COSTELLO
(Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:4:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE FRANK REPRIMAND -- HON. TED WEISS (Extension of Remarks - July 26,
1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:3:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
PERSONAL EXPLANATION (House of Representatives - July 26, 1990)
[Page: H5682]Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, on the vote earlier today
concerning a reprimand for Mr. Frank, inadvertently I was not recorded
as having voted. Whether this was the result of mechanical error or
not, I wish to have the Record show that had my vote been recorded I
would have been showing as voting for the reprimand.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:2:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
HOUSE VOTE ON REPRIMAND OF REPRESENTATIVE BARNEY FRANK -- HON. MIKE
SYNAR (Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:1:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
> Is that because they
> have a soft spot for homosexual democrats, do you think?
Clearly, being protected by Democrats is beneficial.
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
"Mitchell Holman" <Noemai...@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A0768469...@216.196.97.131...
> "Patriot Games" <Pat...@America.com> wrote in news:4763f659"0"4990
> "4c36...@roadrunner.com:
>> "Governor Swill" <governo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:tjs6m3dllv6opc82f...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:40:13 -0500, "Patriot Games"
>>> <Pat...@America.com> wrote:
>>>>> A "Family Values" whoremonger. Oh, the irony.......
>>>>>> Barney is a pervert protected by Democrats.
>>>>> What was he ever convicted of?
>>>>Nothing that I can think of.
>>>>Being protected by Democrats can come in very handy.
>>> What should he be convicted of?
>> He was allowing a male prostitution ring to be headquartered in his home.
> No arrest, no trial, no conviction. Do explain.
You'd have to ask the local police.
>> That should have been enough for the Senate Ethics Committee to boot him.
> The GOP ran the Senate Ethics Committee for 12 years
> and took no action on this "crime".
Caught LYING, again.
"Frank, one of two openly gay members of Congress, confirmed Friday
that he paid Gobie for sex, hired him with personal funds as an aide
and wrote letters on congressional stationery on his behalf to
Virginia probation officials, but Frank said he fired Gobie when he
learned that clients were visiting the apartment."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/tours/scandal/gobie2.htm
Formal Reprimand of Rep. Frank Is Urged by House's Ethics Panel
July 20, 1990
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD81731F933A15754C0A966958260
IN THE MATTER OF REPRESENT- ATIVE BARNEY FRANK (House of
Representatives July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:17:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURES OF BARNEY FRANK -- HON.
HENRY A. WAXMAN (Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:10:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
EXPLANATION OF AGENDA FOR DEBATE IN THE MATTER OF REPRESENTATIVE
BARNEY FRANK (House of Representatives - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:9:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE REPRIMAND OF CONGRESSMAN BARNEY FRANK -- HON. JERRY F. COSTELLO
(Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:4:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
THE FRANK REPRIMAND -- HON. TED WEISS (Extension of Remarks - July 26,
1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:3:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
PERSONAL EXPLANATION (House of Representatives - July 26, 1990)
[Page: H5682]Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, on the vote earlier today
concerning a reprimand for Mr. Frank, inadvertently I was not recorded
as having voted. Whether this was the result of mechanical error or
not, I wish to have the Record show that had my vote been recorded I
would have been showing as voting for the reprimand.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:2:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
HOUSE VOTE ON REPRIMAND OF REPRESENTATIVE BARNEY FRANK -- HON. MIKE
SYNAR (Extension of Remarks - July 26, 1990)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r101:1:./temp/~r101ACXPFW::
> Is that because they
> have a soft spot for homosexual democrats, do you think?
Clearly, being protected by Democrats is beneficial.
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
R Jim Crowe
Mar 31, 2013, 9:12:41 PM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:11:20 -0500, Mitchell Holman
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
<Noe...@comcast.com> wrote:
>Patriot Games <Pat...@America.Com> wrote in
>news:ihrm84t19cp6hjfm5...@4ax.com:
>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:24:42 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <Noe...@comcast.com> wrote:
>>> In an age of Mark Foley
>> He wrote some emails....
> ...and resigned from Congress before the
>House Ethics Committee could take action.
False. The House Ethics Committee had NO ACTION it could take:
"The report said the panel could find no evidence Foley sent sexually
explicit messages to active pages, only that he initiated contact
while they were pages and the exchanges turned lurid after they had
left the program."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/08/foley.ethics/index.html
YOU claimed Mark Foley "resigned from Congress before the House Ethics
Committee could take action."
YOU LIED.
>>>and Larry Craig
>> He pleaded guilty to tapping his foot....
> A convicted criminal.
False. He has NOT been convicted of anything. He plead guilty to a
"misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct by signing and mailing a
plea petition..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Craig
YOU claimed Larry Craig had been "convicted."
YOU LIED.
>>>and David Vetter
>> He made a phone call...
> Sex with a hooker while preaching "family values".
False. ZERO proof of ANY CONTACT other than telephone calls NOT MADE
BY HIM, "records show that Vitter's number was called by Palfrey's
service five times..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Vitter
YOU claimed David Vitter had "sex with a hooker."
YOU LIED.
>>>the story of a former politician having a mistress just isn't
>>>newsworthy anymore.........
>> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!
> Change meds again, Bob?
Three claims by you.
Three LIES by YOU.
YOU are a PROVEN LIAR, again.
Vickey Pate
Mar 31, 2013, 9:12:56 PM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:07:52 -0500, Mitchell Holman
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
<noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
> But not for whore-monger David Vitter, patron
>of prostitutes...
Oops! Caught LYING, again...
"In early July 2007, Vitter's phone number was included in a published
list of phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates, a company owned
and run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, also known as the "D.C. Madam"...
"Phone records show that Vitter's number was called by Palfrey's
service five times...
"Canal Street Madam: On July 10, 2007, Jeanette Maier, the "Canal
Street Madam", alleged that Vitter was a customer on more than one
occasion in the 1990s, when Maier was identified by federal
prosecutors as operating a "300 per hour brothel. The Times-Picayune
reported that "Maier offered no evidence or documents to support her
claim."
YOU said Vitter was a "whore-monger..."
YOU LIED.
YOU said Vitter was a "patron of prostitutes..."
YOU LIED.
Delia Randolph
Mar 31, 2013, 9:13:06 PM3/31/13
to
"Denny" is a Socialist-Communist Troll, a moderately retarded fool,
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
On 19 Feb 2013 21:38:10 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>The conservative/republicans are anti-Christiany.
>What is Chiristianiy? Basically the sermon on the mount, the beatitudes,
>and commentary.
>Love, kindness, compassion, especially for the poor. Turn the other cheek,
>go the extra mile. Love your enemies. Rightists are against these core
>principles. They HATE. the poor, other races, other religions, other
>philosophies. Sexual orietations.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Christianity is a monotheistic and Abrahamic religion based on the
life and teachings of Jesus as presented in canonical gospels and
other New Testament writings. It also considers the Hebrew Bible,
which is known as the Old Testament, to be canonical. Adherents of the
Christian faith are known as Christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On 19 Feb 2013 21:38:10 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>The conservative/republicans are anti-Christiany.
>What is Chiristianiy? Basically the sermon on the mount, the beatitudes,
>and commentary.
>Love, kindness, compassion, especially for the poor. Turn the other cheek,
>go the extra mile. Love your enemies. Rightists are against these core
>principles. They HATE. the poor, other races, other religions, other
>philosophies. Sexual orietations.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Christianity is a monotheistic and Abrahamic religion based on the
life and teachings of Jesus as presented in canonical gospels and
other New Testament writings. It also considers the Hebrew Bible,
which is known as the Old Testament, to be canonical. Adherents of the
Christian faith are known as Christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
Walker Matheny
Mar 31, 2013, 9:13:51 PM3/31/13
to
"Denny" is a Socialist-Communist Troll, a moderately retarded fool,
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On 19 Feb 2013 01:16:13 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
>I'll bet WalMart, or their computers, transferred her because they are
>always desperate for experienced employees. They have a 60% per year
>turmonver, and emplyee training is a huge expense.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"The average retailer has a 60 percent employee turnover rate, meaning
it would need to replace that percentage of its workforce over the
course of a year,..."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-07/wal-mart-to-end-extra-pay-for-sunday-shifts-in-2011-as-duke-targets-costs.html
"...first-year turnover while Wal-Mart's is almost 50 percent."
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/employee-turnover-grocery-15810.html
bobo fizmarkian
Mar 31, 2013, 9:18:37 PM3/31/13
to
>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> glaciation. Gordon
>>
>>
>
>
>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>> glaciation. Gordon
>>
>>
>
>
> As I understand it we are actually overdue
> for another ice age, one that has been delayed by the current round of
> global warming.
If Nature says we need to freeze our nards off, who are we to turn
> for another ice age, one that has been delayed by the current round of
> global warming.
the heater on? We're defying nature.
This planet *needs* to freeze. It's natural. Gaia wants it cold..
It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.
--
Bobo - (What's the Jive? Bird's alive!)
Jeffrey Shepherd
Mar 31, 2013, 9:20:48 PM3/31/13
to
"Denny" is a Socialist-Communist Troll, a moderately retarded fool,
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On 24 Feb 2013 20:08:34 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
>"Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> And how many returning Vietnam vets did you spit on and call a baby
>> killer? Did you ever serve in the military?
>That never happened. Urban myth.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nexis overflows with references to protesters gobbing on Vietnam vets,
and Bob Greene's 1989 book Homecoming: When the Soldiers Returned From
Vietnam counts 63 examples of protester spitting.............
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2000/05/drooling_on_the_vietnam_vets.single.html
Madeleine Terry Fleck-Damon
Mar 31, 2013, 9:21:12 PM3/31/13
to
"Denny" is a Socialist-Communist Troll, a moderately retarded fool,
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On 24 Feb 2013 20:53:54 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
>Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 09:23:08 -0800 (PST), "Robert Westergrom,1900
>> Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" <burto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >And how many returning Vietnam vets did you spit on and call a baby
>> >killer? Did you ever serve in the military?
>> How many did you support when Bush was raising veterans rates, cutting
>> >And how many returning Vietnam vets did you spit on and call a baby
>> >killer? Did you ever serve in the military?
>> benefits?
>But he provided high quality coffins for some of the returning vets.
"But" means YOU ACCEPT the LIE above AS YOURS..............
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Historical Budget Authority for the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA)
Clinton 2001 48,665.2
Bush 2002 53,495.0 <-- 9.9% over Clintoon
Bush 2009 99,447.3 <-- 104% over Clintoon!!!!!!
Bush 86% Total increase.............
Obogus 2010 112,694.6
Obogus 2011 124,383.5
Obogus 2012 125,304.3
Obogus 11% Total increase.............
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22897.pdf
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 9:44:21 PM3/31/13
to
George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:CD7DDC99.9972E%ghost_...@hotmail.com:
AND Nobel. What academic prizes have you ever won?
Mitchell Holman
Mar 31, 2013, 9:46:58 PM3/31/13
to
George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:CD7DD14E.99715%ghost_...@hotmail.com:
>
>
>
> On 3/30/13 11:08 PM, in article
> XnsA193EB2448458...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
>> news:nvafl89oc8ern1bh6s66q16utvtlfbei1c@ 4ax.com:
>> but a Republican would vote for. Twice.......
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "I heard somebody say, 'Where's Nelson Mandela?' Well,
>> Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas."
>> George W. Bush, on the former South African president who
>> is still very much alive, Sept. 20, 2007
>>
>
> You sound like you need a Breathalizer...
Your president was an idiot.
K W. Floyd
Mar 31, 2013, 10:24:02 PM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:29:39 -0500, Mitchell Holman
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
<noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Just like there are "no witnesses" that can place Bush
>at the Guard unit he claimed to be stationed at.
Oops! Michelle caught LYING, again...
Former Guardsman: Bush served with me in Alabama
2/13/2004
A retired Alabama Air National Guard officer said Friday that he
remembers George Bush showing up for duty in Alabama in 1972, reading
safety magazines and flight manuals in an office as he performed his
weekend obligations.
"I saw him each drill period," retired Lt. Col. John "Bill" Calhoun
said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press from Daytona
Beach, Fla., where he is preparing to watch this weekend's big NASCAR
race.
"He was very aggressive about doing his duty there. He never
complained about it. ... He was very dedicated to what he was doing in
the Guard. He showed up on time and he left at the end of the day."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-02-13-bush-military_x.htm
Nakia Mayes
Mar 31, 2013, 10:24:20 PM3/31/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:29:39 -0500, Mitchell Holman
<noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Just like there are "no witnesses" that can place Bush
>at the Guard unit he claimed to be stationed at.
<nom...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Dr. GW <godshol...@heavenmail.org> wrote in
>news:kv39k6p3ugd9v4s9c...@4ax.com:
>> America was found on Christian principals & the sooner we get back to
>> the Christian virtues of men like Thomas Jefferson & Thomas Paine
> ....neither of whom were Christians........
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
God is the power of first cause, nature is the law, and matter is the
subject acted upon. Thomas Paine.
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/existence_of_god.html
I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond
this life. Thomas Paine.
http://www.ushistory.org/paine/reason/reason1.htm
Thomas Paine's last words were: I die in perfect composure and
resignation to the will of my Creator, God.
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cdf/onug/paine.html
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 11:11:59 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> this subject.
I hope you enjoy reading how easily 'climate deniers' are debunked..
>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES ALL
>>>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>>>> FACT.
>>>
>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>
>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> This link is of interest:
> http://ossfoundation.us/
Nope, it's bogus, completely bogus..
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
"The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)
describes itself as "a small research institute" that
studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition,
preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging."
It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist
who has a long history of controversial entanglements
with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM
also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned
about socialism in the public schools" and publishes
books on how to survive nuclear war.
In 1998 the OISM circulated the Oregon Petition, a deceptive
"scientists' petition" skeptical of global warming, in
collaboration with Frederick Seitz."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Frederick_Seitz#Tobacco_industry_involvement_and_documents
"A 2006 article in Vanity Fair magazine called Dr. Seitz
the "$45 million man" for the amount of money he helped
R.J. Reynolds distribute for research that specifically
avoided the health issues surrounding smoking. "They didn't
want us looking at the health effects of cigarette smoking,"
Seitz admitted in the article. During the time RJR was funding
the research, it used the results of the program to claim
that the evidence was inconclusive about the health effects
of smoking. Dr. Seitz went on to become a denier of
global warming."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Oregon_Petition#Case_Study:_The_Oregon_Petition
"Robinson's paper claimed to show that pumping carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere is actually a good thing. "As atmospheric
CO2 increases," it stated, "plant growth rates increase.
Also, leaves lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants
are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which
depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally."
As a result, Robinson concluded, industrial activities can
be counted on to encourage greater species biodiversity
and a greener planet"
Again, that's simply abject nonsense..
>
> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
....
> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS BASED ON
>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>
>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past 15 or
>>> so years?
>>
>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>
> Several of the links in your cite below have interesting articles on
>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>
>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past 15 or
>>> so years?
>>
>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>
> this subject.
I hope you enjoy reading how easily 'climate deniers' are debunked..
>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES ALL
>>>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>>>> FACT.
>>>
>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>
>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> http://ossfoundation.us/
Nope, it's bogus, completely bogus..
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
"The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)
describes itself as "a small research institute" that
studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition,
preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging."
It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist
who has a long history of controversial entanglements
with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM
also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned
about socialism in the public schools" and publishes
books on how to survive nuclear war.
In 1998 the OISM circulated the Oregon Petition, a deceptive
"scientists' petition" skeptical of global warming, in
collaboration with Frederick Seitz."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Frederick_Seitz#Tobacco_industry_involvement_and_documents
"A 2006 article in Vanity Fair magazine called Dr. Seitz
the "$45 million man" for the amount of money he helped
R.J. Reynolds distribute for research that specifically
avoided the health issues surrounding smoking. "They didn't
want us looking at the health effects of cigarette smoking,"
Seitz admitted in the article. During the time RJR was funding
the research, it used the results of the program to claim
that the evidence was inconclusive about the health effects
of smoking. Dr. Seitz went on to become a denier of
global warming."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Oregon_Petition#Case_Study:_The_Oregon_Petition
"Robinson's paper claimed to show that pumping carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere is actually a good thing. "As atmospheric
CO2 increases," it stated, "plant growth rates increase.
Also, leaves lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants
are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which
depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally."
As a result, Robinson concluded, industrial activities can
be counted on to encourage greater species biodiversity
and a greener planet"
Again, that's simply abject nonsense..
Man of Mind
Mar 31, 2013, 11:16:30 PM3/31/13
to
On 3/31/2013 9:09 PM, deletus cleetus whimpered and groveled for:
>
> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
....
Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
>
> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
....
>>>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS BASED ON
>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>
>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past
>>> 15 or so years?
>>
>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>
>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE
>>>> REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>
>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>
>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> Only deluded, gullible idiots
>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>
>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past
>>> 15 or so years?
>>
>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>
>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE
>>>> REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>
>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>
>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
Message has been deleted
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 1:55:26 AM4/1/13
to
On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind <baron.von.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
Perfect proof that man is not responsible for any perceived global
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
warming which has been now changed to meet the new data that indicates
the earth is cooling by calling any temperature variation "climate
change".
The nutty nuts at the EPA have labeled CO2 a toxic gas in the
atmosphere, however, the nutty nuts forgot that most vegetation lives
off of CO2, so rather than being a toxic gas to plant life, it is a
required ingredient of life. Guess where most O2 comes from...It is
not plants or trees. It is Plankton in the top few inches of sea
water that produces most of the atmospheric oxygen that we breath.
God is so smart.
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 1:58:17 AM4/1/13
to
On Mar 31, 12:06 pm, George Kerby <ghost_top...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> An illegal alien, a Communist, and a Muslim walked into a bar, and the
> bartender said.... "Hello there, Mr. President!"
Oh my golly....start watching for unmarked vehicles parking out in
front of your home and following you and photographing you. Such
hilarious comedy is clearly unapproved.
> An illegal alien, a Communist, and a Muslim walked into a bar, and the
> bartender said.... "Hello there, Mr. President!"
Oh my golly....start watching for unmarked vehicles parking out in
front of your home and following you and photographing you. Such
hilarious comedy is clearly unapproved.
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 2:10:18 AM4/1/13
to
On Mar 31, 12:16 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Ice ages don't happen because it's their turn. They happen becouse of
> cooler tempratures.
They happen because of a cycle. The earth's orbit becomes more
> Ice ages don't happen because it's their turn. They happen becouse of
> cooler tempratures.
elliptical which causes less heat from the sun to reach the earth.
Thus, the sun's heat is the only heat that reaches the earth. Space
is deadly cold without a heat source, and in our solar system, we have
only one sun to warm our atmosphere. See below for a bit of evidence:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Orbital forcing is the effect on climate of slow changes in the tilt
of the Earth's axis and shape of the orbit (see Milankovitch cycles).
These orbital changes change the total amount of sunlight reaching the
Earth by up to 25% at mid-latitudes (from 400 to 500 Wm-2 at latitudes
of 60 degrees). In this context, the term "forcing" signifies a
physical process that affects the Earth's climate.
This mechanism is believed to be responsible for the timing of the ice
age cycles. A strict application of the Milankovitch theory does not
allow the prediction of a "sudden" ice age (rapid being anything under
a century or two), since the fastest orbital period is about 20,000
years. The timing of past glacial periods coincides very well with the
predictions of the Milankovitch theory, and these effects can be
calculated into the future.
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 2:19:21 AM4/1/13
to
On Mar 31, 8:58 pm, joecool99...@hotmail.com wrote:
> No, they don't. In fact several of the hottest years on record have occurred in the last ten yesrs.
Are you accounting for the variations in instrumentation of old vs.
today?
Are you allowing for the fact that we have been taking temperature
readings for a very short period of time compared to the age of the
earth's atmosphere?
Were the "hottest years" a reflection of temps in North America vs.
other areas where the temps were much cooler?
Are you considering the religious nature of extreme environmentalism
and the effect this new religion can have on the facts?
Do you think there is a possibility of out right lies being told to
the public to further the cause of "climate change"?
> No, they don't. In fact several of the hottest years on record have occurred in the last ten yesrs.
Are you accounting for the variations in instrumentation of old vs.
today?
Are you allowing for the fact that we have been taking temperature
readings for a very short period of time compared to the age of the
earth's atmosphere?
Were the "hottest years" a reflection of temps in North America vs.
other areas where the temps were much cooler?
Are you considering the religious nature of extreme environmentalism
and the effect this new religion can have on the facts?
Do you think there is a possibility of out right lies being told to
the public to further the cause of "climate change"?
Message has been deleted
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 6:37:39 AM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>
> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
> The nutty nuts at the EPAhave labeled CO2 a toxic gas
Hrmm, let's put you in a room full of CO2, how long do
you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
>
> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
.....
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>>>> The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts
>>>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>>>> no emissions targets.
>>>>>
>>>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>>>> look bad.
>>>>
>>>>> have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with
>>>>> no emissions targets.
>>>>>
>>>>> Liberals will believe anything if it makes our Nation and/or humans
>>>>> look bad.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe all this information shows that we are over the peak and now
>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>
>>>> headed back down that long, long slope into the next period of
>>>> glaciation. Gordon
>>>
>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>
>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>
>>
>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>
>> http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
>>
>> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
>> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
>> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
>> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
>> that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
>> other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
>>
>> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
>> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
>> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
>> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
>> that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
>> other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
>>
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
>>
>> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
>> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
>> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
>> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
>> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
>> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
>> sun's heat."
>
> Perfect proof that man is not responsible for any perceived global
> warming
Only if you take the above cites out of context, spacey..
>> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
>> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
>> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
>> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
>> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
>> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
>> sun's heat."
>
> Perfect proof that man is not responsible for any perceived global
> warming
> The nutty nuts at the EPAhave labeled CO2 a toxic gas
Hrmm, let's put you in a room full of CO2, how long do
you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 6:42:50 AM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 4:37 AM, Mike Smith bravely deleted and bleated:
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:45:40 -0500, Man of Mind was heckling:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining impotently:
.....
And you don't delete cites that refute your pathetic mewlings, right?
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:45:40 -0500, Man of Mind was heckling:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 10:57 AM, Mike Smith deleted and bleated:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:10:56 -0500, Man of Mind restored:
>> On 3/31/2013 10:57 AM, Mike Smith deleted and bleated:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith was whining impotently:
.....
>>>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>
>>> Yes folks, libtards ARE stupid enough to believe the Sun does not control our weather.
>>>>
>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>
>>
>> Demonizing your opponent won't help you, you fueless cluck..
>
> I do not demonize libtards
>> Demonizing your opponent won't help you, you fueless cluck..
>
And you don't delete cites that refute your pathetic mewlings, right?
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid/
"It�s very true that the earth is warmed, for all practical
purposes, entirely by solar radiation. So if the temperature
is going up or down a reasonable place to find the cause
would be the sun. Well, it turns out that it is more
complicated than one might think to detect and measure
changes in the amount or type of sunshine reaching the earth.
Detectors on the ground are too susceptible to all kinds of
interference from the atmosphere. After all, one good cloud
passing overhead can cause an instant shiver on an otherwise
beautiful, warm day, but not because the sun itself changed.
The best way to detect changes in the actual output of the
sun versus changes in the radiation reaching the earth�s
surface because of clouds, smoke, dust or pollution is
by taking readings from space. "
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 6:59:07 AM4/1/13
to
On 3/31/2013 10:48 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES
>>>>>> ALL
>>>>>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>
>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>
>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>
>>> This link is of interest:
>>> http://ossfoundation.us/
Delete something, David?
Again, you've accused others of what you, yourself, have done..
> Which isn't the link I posted
But, it's from the same web-site, same fringe science organization..
> What I posted was taken from the link you provided
I didn't 'cite' a fringe science web-site..
> Your dishonesty is disappointing
You should see the view from here..
> It is child's play to follow the posting
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
......
> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS BASED ON
>>>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past
>>>>> 15 or so years?
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>>
>>> Several of the links in your cite below have interesting articles on
>>> this subject.
>>
>> I hope you enjoy reading how easily 'climate deniers' are debunked..
Example follows..
>>>>>> OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the past
>>>>> 15 or so years?
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>>
>>> Several of the links in your cite below have interesting articles on
>>> this subject.
>>
>> I hope you enjoy reading how easily 'climate deniers' are debunked..
>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED DISCIPLINES
>>>>>> ALL
>>>>>> AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED
>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>
>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>
>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>
>>> This link is of interest:
>>> http://ossfoundation.us/
> Which isn't the link I posted
But, it's from the same web-site, same fringe science organization..
> What I posted was taken from the link you provided
I didn't 'cite' a fringe science web-site..
> Your dishonesty is disappointing
You should see the view from here..
> It is child's play to follow the posting
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 8:41:27 AM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 7:12 AM, bleatus cleetus whimpered and groveled for:
>
> Man of Mind noted the lack of comprehension, on the behalf of:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 9:09 PM, bleatus cleetus whimpered and groveled for:
To you, that is..
Maybe you should learn some critical thinking skills?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_generalization
>
> Man of Mind noted the lack of comprehension, on the behalf of:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 9:09 PM, bleatus cleetus whimpered and groveled for:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
......
>>> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> THE FACT THAT THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS RISING IS
>>>>>> BASED ON OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the
>>>>> past 15 or so years?
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>>>
>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE
>>>>>> REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>
>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>
>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>
>>> Only deluded, gullible idiots
>>
>> Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
>
> That makes no sense whatsoever
>>>>>> BASED ON OBSERVED TEMPERATURE READINGS, YOU IDIOT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not those observations actually show that there has been no
>>>>> statistically significant rise in global temperatures in the
>>>>> past 15 or so years?
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they don't show that, at all..
>>>>
>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF THE
>>>>>> REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>
>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>
>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>
>>> Only deluded, gullible idiots
>>
>> Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
>
To you, that is..
Maybe you should learn some critical thinking skills?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_generalization
Lee L. Curtis
Apr 1, 2013, 8:41:33 AM4/1/13
to
Tracey12 wrote:
> On Mar 31, 12:16 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>
> > Ice ages don't happen because it's their turn. They happen becouse
> > of cooler tempratures.
>
> They happen because of a cycle. The earth's orbit becomes more
> elliptical which causes less heat from the sun to reach the earth.
Mindless man doesn't believe the Sun controls Earth's weather.
> On Mar 31, 12:16 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>
> > Ice ages don't happen because it's their turn. They happen becouse
> > of cooler tempratures.
>
> They happen because of a cycle. The earth's orbit becomes more
> elliptical which causes less heat from the sun to reach the earth.
> Thus, the sun's heat is the only heat that reaches the earth. Space
> is deadly cold without a heat source, and in our solar system, we have
> only one sun to warm our atmosphere. See below for a bit of evidence:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------
>
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
>
> Orbital forcing is the effect on climate of slow changes in the tilt
> of the Earth's axis and shape of the orbit (see Milankovitch cycles).
> These orbital changes change the total amount of sunlight reaching the
> Earth by up to 25% at mid-latitudes (from 400 to 500 Wm-2 at latitudes
> of 60 degrees). In this context, the term "forcing" signifies a
> physical process that affects the Earth's climate.
>
> This mechanism is believed to be responsible for the timing of the ice
> age cycles. A strict application of the Milankovitch theory does not
> allow the prediction of a "sudden" ice age (rapid being anything under
> a century or two), since the fastest orbital period is about 20,000
> years. The timing of past glacial periods coincides very well with the
> predictions of the Milankovitch theory, and these effects can be
> calculated into the future.
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 8:52:09 AM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 7:21 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> The link you posted, I assume to support the idea that
> 90% of climate scientists believe in AGW:
It's not a matter of 'belief', David. It's a matter of
scientific consensus, which stands at about 97%, in case
you didn't know..
> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> At that site was this link:
Which "by Myth" heading are you finding this at? You
weren't specific, which causes me to doubt your word..
> http://www.ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths
I've already debunked the veracity of that cite..
> This seems to cast doubt on your ongoing insistence
No, the 'doubt' being 'cast' is from a dubious organization
of no scientific merit, as I've already pointed out for you
to learn from..
> Yes, I erred in that I missed the fact that the link
> I followed went to the oss.us site, and from then
> accused you of changing my post.
Your 'post' contained a cite/web-URL that isn't listed here:
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
> On the other hand, you seem to be no better than anyone else
> when it comes to posting citations without fully checking them out.
Well, that's usually because I understand the underlying science
and the basic premises that THE sciences follow..
Maybe you shouldn't presume to know the subject better than
I do, especially when you attempt to 'cast doubt' as to the
veracity and basis' of my counter-arguments..
>
> On 04/01/2013 05:59 AM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 10:48 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
.......
> On 04/01/2013 05:59 AM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>
>> On 3/31/2013 10:48 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> 90% of climate scientists believe in AGW:
It's not a matter of 'belief', David. It's a matter of
scientific consensus, which stands at about 97%, in case
you didn't know..
> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>
> At that site was this link:
Which "by Myth" heading are you finding this at? You
weren't specific, which causes me to doubt your word..
> http://www.ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths
I've already debunked the veracity of that cite..
> This seems to cast doubt on your ongoing insistence
No, the 'doubt' being 'cast' is from a dubious organization
of no scientific merit, as I've already pointed out for you
to learn from..
> Yes, I erred in that I missed the fact that the link
> I followed went to the oss.us site, and from then
> accused you of changing my post.
Your 'post' contained a cite/web-URL that isn't listed here:
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
> On the other hand, you seem to be no better than anyone else
> when it comes to posting citations without fully checking them out.
Well, that's usually because I understand the underlying science
and the basic premises that THE sciences follow..
Maybe you shouldn't presume to know the subject better than
I do, especially when you attempt to 'cast doubt' as to the
veracity and basis' of my counter-arguments..
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 9:02:26 AM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>
> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
> Duhhh, idiot, we all spend time in rooms that are full of CO2.
That explains the atrophy of your mind, however..
> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth
Incorrect. I stated, with cites, that the variations in the
Sun's solar output has very little to do with global warming
due to man-made CO2 (roughly 30 billions tons a year) being
expelled into the troposphere, bleatus..
Maybe you should wake up and smell the oxygen?
>
> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
.......
>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
That explains the atrophy of your mind, however..
> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth
Incorrect. I stated, with cites, that the variations in the
Sun's solar output has very little to do with global warming
due to man-made CO2 (roughly 30 billions tons a year) being
expelled into the troposphere, bleatus..
Maybe you should wake up and smell the oxygen?
Mitchell Holman
Apr 1, 2013, 9:24:45 AM4/1/13
to
dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote in
news:20130331233751.823$X...@newsreader.com:
> Don't worry he hasn't seen the movie. I've never met a right winger
> who has. They're terrified that they might learn something. A closed
> mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Maybe they should get out more, do some travelling.
Glacier National Park was named for the 150 glaciers found
there in 1850. There are just 27 left today, and none will
be left by 2030. www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/glaciers.htm
news:20130331233751.823$X...@newsreader.com:
> who has. They're terrified that they might learn something. A closed
> mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Maybe they should get out more, do some travelling.
Glacier National Park was named for the 150 glaciers found
there in 1850. There are just 27 left today, and none will
be left by 2030. www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/glaciers.htm
George Kerby
Apr 1, 2013, 10:58:50 AM4/1/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:44 PM, in article
XnsA194D2A206900...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
You win the Dunce Cap Douchebag Trophy, congrats!
George Kerby
Apr 1, 2013, 11:01:36 AM4/1/13
to
On 3/31/13 8:46 PM, in article
XnsA194D314379EB...@216.196.121.131, "Mitchell Holman"
YOUR resident, appropriately, is honored on this very day...
David Hartung
Apr 1, 2013, 11:04:01 AM4/1/13
to
On 03/31/2013 08:46 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Your president was an idiot.
So you believe Obama to be an idiot? That isn't very nice.
> Your president was an idiot.
Orval Fairbairn
Apr 1, 2013, 2:18:18 PM4/1/13
to
In article <XnsA194D2A206900...@216.196.121.131>,
Weren't Gore's awards for fiction and creative infomercials?
Orval Fairbairn
Apr 1, 2013, 2:19:38 PM4/1/13
to
In article <20130331233751.823$X...@newsreader.com>,
dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
slicer-dicers -- and it was about as truthful.
dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Don't worry he hasn't seen the movie. I've never met a right winger who
> has. They're terrified that they might learn something. A closed mind is a
> terrible thing to waste.
I saw it -- it reminded me of the late-night TV infomercials selling
> has. They're terrified that they might learn something. A closed mind is a
> terrible thing to waste.
slicer-dicers -- and it was about as truthful.
Orval Fairbairn
Apr 1, 2013, 2:20:38 PM4/1/13
to
Kenny McCormack
Apr 1, 2013, 2:58:04 PM4/1/13
to
In article <orfairbairn-626D...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,
Orval Fairbairn <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
...
>No, he still is!
Someday, you may rise about kindergarten level in your use of wit and
repartee.
--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."
Orval Fairbairn <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
...
>No, he still is!
Someday, you may rise about kindergarten level in your use of wit and
repartee.
--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 6:18:20 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 12:14 PM, faulty sham sniveled impotently because:
>
> On Apr 1, 9:04 am, Man of Mind was berating the ignorance exhibited by:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 7:55 AM, bleatus whimpered and groveled for:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind was amused by the ambitious ignorance of:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:12 AM, bleatus whimpered and groveled for:
>>
>> How much would you like to wager on that, bleatus?
>
> Hey Kurt
Who?
> can you give one example where you successfully used your
> "critical thinking skills"?
Easily, faulty sham.. Let's start with Muffette's challenge,
you know, the one he didn't pay up afterwards..
>
> "%%%% Shall we say $5,000?"
>
> "%%%% The college sais they never heard of you."
>
> "%%%% I saw a generic BS degree with someone elses name on it"
>
> "%%%% It was an easy bet since you do not have
> and never will be asble to produce a physics degree."
>
> "%%%% Show us your wrong answer again!"
>
> "%%%% It is quite apparent you cannot read since you got
> the answer wrong."
>
> "%%%% I know my 12 year old grandkid is smarter than you"
>
> "%%%% AMAZING! You got it wrong 20 times until you saw the
> answer given by others!
>
> "%%%% No need for an equation since objects fall at 32 feet
> per second/per second and the ball was traveling at 1,000
> feet per second.
>
> (1) How far will the cannon ball go before it hits the ground?
> ----> 1,000 feet
>
> (2) How long will it take for the cannon ball to hit the ground?
> ----> 1 second.?
Nope..
Since y and v(0)*t both equal zero, here's the next step..
32f = 16f/s^2 * t^2
Dividing the 16 out of the right side..
32'/16' = 2 = t^2 thus t = square root of 2 = 1.414 seconds..
I gave you a chance to check your answer several times over..
--
"If you were to ball a ball 500 miles above the Earth's surface"
"Oh, the units are in energy - kg x ft^2/sec^2"
"Anyway, I didn't even bother to out in the units in the equation"
>
> On Apr 1, 9:04 am, Man of Mind was berating the ignorance exhibited by:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 7:55 AM, bleatus whimpered and groveled for:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind was amused by the ambitious ignorance of:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:12 AM, bleatus whimpered and groveled for:
>>>>>
>>>>> Man of Mind noted the lack of comprehension, on the behalf of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 9:09 PM, bleatus whimpered and groveled for:
>>>>> Man of Mind noted the lack of comprehension, on the behalf of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
..........
>>>>>>> Man of Mind was castigating the ambitious ignorance exhibited by:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung knee-jerked when:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>>>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF
>>>>>>>>>> THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>>>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>>>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only deluded, gullible idiots
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes no sense whatsoever
>>>>
>>>> To you, that is..
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should learn some critical thinking skills?
>>>
>>> ROTFLOL! You don't even know what "critical thinking skills" are!
>>>>>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF
>>>>>>>>>> THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>>>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>>>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only deluded, gullible idiots
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like yourself resorting to false generalization, eh?
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes no sense whatsoever
>>>>
>>>> To you, that is..
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should learn some critical thinking skills?
>>>
>>
>> How much would you like to wager on that, bleatus?
>
> Hey Kurt
Who?
> can you give one example where you successfully used your
> "critical thinking skills"?
Easily, faulty sham.. Let's start with Muffette's challenge,
you know, the one he didn't pay up afterwards..
>
> "%%%% Shall we say $5,000?"
>
> "%%%% The college sais they never heard of you."
>
> "%%%% I saw a generic BS degree with someone elses name on it"
>
> "%%%% It was an easy bet since you do not have
> and never will be asble to produce a physics degree."
>
> "%%%% Show us your wrong answer again!"
>
> "%%%% It is quite apparent you cannot read since you got
> the answer wrong."
>
> "%%%% I know my 12 year old grandkid is smarter than you"
>
> "%%%% AMAZING! You got it wrong 20 times until you saw the
> answer given by others!
>
> "%%%% No need for an equation since objects fall at 32 feet
> per second/per second and the ball was traveling at 1,000
> feet per second.
>
> (1) How far will the cannon ball go before it hits the ground?
> ----> 1,000 feet
>
> (2) How long will it take for the cannon ball to hit the ground?
> ----> 1 second.?
Nope..
Since y and v(0)*t both equal zero, here's the next step..
32f = 16f/s^2 * t^2
Dividing the 16 out of the right side..
32'/16' = 2 = t^2 thus t = square root of 2 = 1.414 seconds..
I gave you a chance to check your answer several times over..
--
"If you were to ball a ball 500 miles above the Earth's surface"
"Oh, the units are in energy - kg x ft^2/sec^2"
"Anyway, I didn't even bother to out in the units in the equation"
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 6:33:45 PM4/1/13
to
On Apr 1, 5:37 am, Man of Mind <baron.von.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hrmm, let's put you in a room full of CO2, how long do
> you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
That's correct. But, the EPA was describing CO2 as a atmospheric
> Hrmm, let's put you in a room full of CO2, how long do
> you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
toxic gas, not a room.
And, we are discussing climatology, not a room.
QUESTION: What would a room full of nothing but Oxygen be?
Tracey12
Apr 1, 2013, 6:43:29 PM4/1/13
to
On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Duhhh, idiot, we all spend time in rooms that are full of CO2. That's
> because, like all animal life, inhale oxygen and expire CO2. You are so
> stupid you didn't know that!?
>
> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes you
> are that profoundly stupid.
I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun. That takes some
amazing science.
Whats hilarious is that some of the libs on this thread do not realize
that any gas in high concentration is toxic to all life, even oxygen.
So, when the EPA labels normal atmospheric gases like CO2 a toxic gas,
you have to wonder what their political objectives are.
The EPA is an arm of the communistic left. It imposes rules and
regulations to advance the power of the state. It does not care on
whit about humanity. It cares about power to control humanity.
> Duhhh, idiot, we all spend time in rooms that are full of CO2. That's
> because, like all animal life, inhale oxygen and expire CO2. You are so
> stupid you didn't know that!?
>
> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes you
> are that profoundly stupid.
I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun. That takes some
amazing science.
Whats hilarious is that some of the libs on this thread do not realize
that any gas in high concentration is toxic to all life, even oxygen.
So, when the EPA labels normal atmospheric gases like CO2 a toxic gas,
you have to wonder what their political objectives are.
The EPA is an arm of the communistic left. It imposes rules and
regulations to advance the power of the state. It does not care on
whit about humanity. It cares about power to control humanity.
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 7:46:51 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 7:19 AM, bleatus interrupted:
>
> David Hartung wrote, in a reply to:
>> you provided and was completely different.
>>
>> Your dishonesty is disappointing, and more than a little bit stupid.
>> It is child's play to follow the posting and see what was actually
>> said.
>
> You must remember that you are dealing with someone
Oh now, you know that David is at least a couple of grade-levels
ahead of you. But, you're just trying to avoid how easily your
childish 'climate denier' clap-trap is debunked..
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures, which seek to resemble ideas"
-Lionel Trilling
>
> David Hartung wrote, in a reply to:
>>
>> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>>
>> On 03/31/2013 10:11 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/31/2013 9:18 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/31/2013 06:58 PM, Man of Mind wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/31/2013 5:53 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
.......
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/31/2013 01:33 PM, joecoo...@hotmail.com wrote:
.......
>>>>>>> AND OVER 90% OF THE WORLD'S CLIMATOLOGISTS AND RELATED
>>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF
>>>>>>> THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>>
>> Which isn't the link I posted. What I posted was taken from the link
>>>>>>> DISCIPLINES ALL AGREE THAT ACTIVITIES BY MAN ARE PART OF
>>>>>>> THE REASON FOR THIS OBSERVED FACT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I often see this claim, but never any sort of support.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you simply ignore supporting cites because you can't
>>>>> actually understand the objective analysis that goes into
>>>>> such studies, so addicted to unreliable beliefs you are..
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
>>>>
>> you provided and was completely different.
>>
>> Your dishonesty is disappointing, and more than a little bit stupid.
>> It is child's play to follow the posting and see what was actually
>> said.
>
> You must remember that you are dealing with someone
Oh now, you know that David is at least a couple of grade-levels
ahead of you. But, you're just trying to avoid how easily your
childish 'climate denier' clap-trap is debunked..
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki#By_Myth
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
-Lionel Trilling
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 8:24:22 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 5:33 PM, spacey12 deleted and bleated because:
>
> On Apr 1, 5:37 am, Man of Mind restored:
Sun somehow controls our planet's climate in some manner
that would explain global warming?
Don't try to change the subject after you've been proven wrong,
it makes you look like a venal coward, spacey..
Here's my cites:
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
-Lionel Trilling
>
> On Apr 1, 5:37 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
.......
>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:40:31 -0500, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:46:10 -0500, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> Hrmm, let's put you in a room full of CO2, how long do
>> you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
>
> That's correct.
Indeed, so are you backing down from your BS about how the
>> you think you'd last? Not very, is my expected value..
>
> That's correct.
Sun somehow controls our planet's climate in some manner
that would explain global warming?
Don't try to change the subject after you've been proven wrong,
it makes you look like a venal coward, spacey..
Here's my cites:
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures, which seek to resemble ideas"
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
-Lionel Trilling
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 8:27:44 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 5:43 PM, Tracey12 wrote:
> On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
..
the context of my replies that refute your specious nonsense..
You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
-Lionel Trilling
> On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
..
>> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes you
>> are that profoundly stupid.
>
> I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
> earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
Even funnier is how you try to change the subject and/or
>> are that profoundly stupid.
>
> I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
> earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
the context of my replies that refute your specious nonsense..
You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures, which seek to resemble ideas"
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
-Lionel Trilling
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 8:41:05 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 1:00 PM, faulty sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled with:
>
> On Apr 1, 1:47 pm, "jay_walker" <jwa...@gmail.com> worked up a snit because:
>>
>> Man of Mind restored the cites and context that refuted:
> Wait hold on, Man of MInd said WHAT?!
That the planet's weather is not controlled by the Sun, and
included cites that debunk you deniers claiming that the sun
controls our climate..
> He didn't believe the sun heats the earth?
Incorrect, again.. Have an adult read it to you and explain..
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
-Lionel Trilling
>
> On Apr 1, 1:47 pm, "jay_walker" <jwa...@gmail.com> worked up a snit because:
>>
>> Man of Mind restored the cites and context that refuted:
>>>
>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>>>>
>>>> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
........
>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>>>>
>>>> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
That the planet's weather is not controlled by the Sun, and
included cites that debunk you deniers claiming that the sun
controls our climate..
> He didn't believe the sun heats the earth?
Incorrect, again.. Have an adult read it to you and explain..
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
--
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
gestures, which seek to resemble ideas"
"Conservatives have no ideas; just irritable mental
-Lionel Trilling
bobo fizmarkian
Apr 1, 2013, 7:46:19 PM4/1/13
to
plants growing all over the place. We put out extra Co2, it just means
more of them.
--
Bobo - (What's the Jive? Bird's alive!)
Man of Mind
Apr 1, 2013, 9:40:22 PM4/1/13
to
On 4/1/2013 7:05 PM, bleatus coitus whimpered again:
>
> Man of Mind was exploiting the sociopathy exhibited by:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 12:47 PM, jay-walker was whimpering for attention from:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind was exploiting the sociopathy exhibited by:
>>
>> Yes, you picked a really bad day to quit sniffing glue..
>
> Steve was right, what an incredible
I see that you're again avoiding the cites that I refuted
your abject nonsense with.. What a surprise that isn't..
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
--
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use
and authority of reason, and whose philosophy
consists in holding humanity in contempt, is
like administering medicine to the dead, or
endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."
--from Common Sense, by Thomas Paine
>
> Man of Mind was exploiting the sociopathy exhibited by:
>>
>> On 4/1/2013 12:47 PM, jay-walker was whimpering for attention from:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind was exploiting the sociopathy exhibited by:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
.....
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>>>>> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth
>>>>
>>>> Incorrect. I stated, with cites, that the variations in the
>>>> Sun's solar output has very little to do with global warming
>>>> due to man-made CO2 (roughly 30 billions tons a year) being
>>>> expelled into the troposphere, bleatus..
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should wake up and smell the oxygen?
>>>
>>> Exactly,
>>>>
>>>> Incorrect. I stated, with cites, that the variations in the
>>>> Sun's solar output has very little to do with global warming
>>>> due to man-made CO2 (roughly 30 billions tons a year) being
>>>> expelled into the troposphere, bleatus..
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should wake up and smell the oxygen?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, you picked a really bad day to quit sniffing glue..
>
> Steve was right, what an incredible
I see that you're again avoiding the cites that I refuted
your abject nonsense with.. What a surprise that isn't..
http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
"[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
"According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
sun's heat."
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use
and authority of reason, and whose philosophy
consists in holding humanity in contempt, is
like administering medicine to the dead, or
endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."
--from Common Sense, by Thomas Paine
V L. Waldrop
Apr 1, 2013, 9:48:08 PM4/1/13
to
"Denny" is a Socialist-Communist Troll, a moderately retarded fool,
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On 23 Mar 2013 20:18:55 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>No dead or mangled Americans durning the Clinton days.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Uphold_Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
and a poor liar.
From: dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny)
X-No-Archive: yes
X-NRC-Trace: NewsReader.Com
.ip5CfWbo4f/2Zrh3HS44sau76+f=Fyz--uvyn0.sm-yCjx.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4e865b5c.ngroups.net
78.134.91.92
Milano, Italy
Host: 78-134-91-92.v4.ngi.it
IP: 78.134.91.92
Please note that when you reply to a Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On 23 Mar 2013 20:18:55 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>No dead or mangled Americans durning the Clinton days.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Uphold_Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Alberta Keefe
Apr 1, 2013, 9:48:27 PM4/1/13
to
Mitchel is a far-left liar, but usually runs away after a few days of
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
<nom...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, any Pedophile
>Priest you care to name - the number of gay bashing
>conservatives who have been discovered to be gay
>themselves is long indeed.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Despite firmly stating that he was not gay and never has been gay,
Craig announced his intention to resign from the Senate at a news
conference on September 1, 2007, but later decided to finish the
remainder of his term."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Craig#2007_arrest_and_consequences
being slapped around. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 22:07:53 -0500, Mitchell Holman
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
<nom...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, any Pedophile
>Priest you care to name - the number of gay bashing
>conservatives who have been discovered to be gay
>themselves is long indeed.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Despite firmly stating that he was not gay and never has been gay,
Craig announced his intention to resign from the Senate at a news
conference on September 1, 2007, but later decided to finish the
remainder of his term."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Craig#2007_arrest_and_consequences
Matthew Bigelow
Apr 1, 2013, 9:48:41 PM4/1/13
to
Lee Curtis is mostly stupid, a proven liar and an ultra-left crackpot.
wrote:
> Funny that John McCain - who HAS seen Romeny's
>tax returns - has not come the defense of his fellow
>Republican.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In an interview with Politico, former Republican presidential
candidate John McCain (R-AZ) denied allegations that Mitt Romney�s tax
returns dissuaded McCain from choosing him as his running mate in the
2008 campaign.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/17/mccain-romneys-taxes-werent-an-issue-in-2008/
Sen. John McCain said on Tuesday he can "personally vouch" there was
nothing disqualifying in the 23 years' worth of tax returns that Mitt
Romney submitted to his team in 2008, when he was vetted for a vice
presidential spot.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html
Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you encourage them to
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:22:37 -0500, "Lee Curtis" <cle...@gmail.com>
continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
wrote:
> Funny that John McCain - who HAS seen Romeny's
>tax returns - has not come the defense of his fellow
>Republican.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In an interview with Politico, former Republican presidential
candidate John McCain (R-AZ) denied allegations that Mitt Romney�s tax
returns dissuaded McCain from choosing him as his running mate in the
2008 campaign.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/17/mccain-romneys-taxes-werent-an-issue-in-2008/
Sen. John McCain said on Tuesday he can "personally vouch" there was
nothing disqualifying in the 23 years' worth of tax returns that Mitt
Romney submitted to his team in 2008, when he was vetted for a vice
presidential spot.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html
Mitchell Holman
Apr 1, 2013, 9:55:20 PM4/1/13
to
David Hartung <david@h0tm*il.com> wrote in
news:0MCdnehgLKh8PMTM...@giganews.com:
> On 03/31/2013 08:46 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> Your president was an idiot.
>
> So you believe Obama to be an idiot? That isn't very nice.
>
No, we were talking about Bush, the
liar that you repeatedly lie about.
"George W Bush never committed a crime."
David Hartung, July 13 2007. In fact Bush
has been arrested for theft and vandalism
and convicted of drunk driving.
news:0MCdnehgLKh8PMTM...@giganews.com:
> On 03/31/2013 08:46 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> Your president was an idiot.
>
> So you believe Obama to be an idiot? That isn't very nice.
>
liar that you repeatedly lie about.
"George W Bush never committed a crime."
David Hartung, July 13 2007. In fact Bush
has been arrested for theft and vandalism
and convicted of drunk driving.
Mitchell Holman
Apr 1, 2013, 9:56:52 PM4/1/13
to
Orval Fairbairn <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:orfairbairn-0675...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net:
No, you are thinking of Lynne Cheney and the
sleezy sex novels that Republicans would have a
hissyfit about if a Democrat wrote them.
news:orfairbairn-0675...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net:
>> >>>>>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatu
>> >>>>>> s-i n-ri s
>> >>>>>> ing-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-
>> >>>>>> s-i n-ri s
>> >>>>>> ing-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-
>> >>>>>> 122 6609 1 40980
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not
>> >>>>>> followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely
>> >>>>>> accepted.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface
>> >>>>>> temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the
>> >>>>>> range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they
>> >>>>>> remain flat, they will fall outside the models' range within a
>> >>>>>> few years.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "The global temperature standstill shows that climate models
>> >>>>>> are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the
>> >>>>>> Global Warming Policy Foundation.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> But the fact that global surface temperatures have not
>> >>>>>> followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely
>> >>>>>> accepted.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface
>> >>>>>> temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the
>> >>>>>> range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they
>> >>>>>> remain flat, they will fall outside the models' range within a
>> >>>>>> few years.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "The global temperature standstill shows that climate models
>> >>>>>> are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the
>> >>>>>> Global Warming Policy Foundation.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green
>> >>>>>> -1- The- h
>> >>>>>> ard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billio
>> >>>>>> -1- The- h
>> >>>>>> ard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billio
sleezy sex novels that Republicans would have a
hissyfit about if a Democrat wrote them.
Lee L. Curtis
Apr 1, 2013, 10:02:38 PM4/1/13
to
Man of Mind wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 5:43 PM, Tracey12 wrote:
> >On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
> ..
> > > Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes
> > > you are that profoundly stupid.
> >
> > I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
> > earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
What fits their GW myth...
> On 4/1/2013 5:43 PM, Tracey12 wrote:
> >On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
> ..
> > > Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes
> > > you are that profoundly stupid.
> >
> > I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
> > earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
>
> Even funnier is how you try to change the subject and/or
>
> You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
I rest my case.
> You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
>
> http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-
> again
>
> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
> that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
>
> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
> other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
emoneyjoe
Apr 1, 2013, 10:06:34 PM4/1/13
to
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:41:05 -0500, Man of Mind
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/1/2013 1:00 PM, faulty sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled with:
>>
>> On Apr 1, 1:47 pm, "jay_walker" <jwa...@gmail.com> worked up a snit because:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind restored the cites and context that refuted:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>>>>>
>>>>> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>........
>>>>>>>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
>>>>>>>> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
>>>>>>>> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
>>>>>>>> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
>>>>>>>> that variations in solar activity – whether on Earth or
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/1/2013 1:00 PM, faulty sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled with:
>>
>> On Apr 1, 1:47 pm, "jay_walker" <jwa...@gmail.com> worked up a snit because:
>>>
>>> Man of Mind restored the cites and context that refuted:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2013 7:31 AM, bleatus was whimpering for attention from:
>>>>>
>>>>> Man of Mind was excoriating the deliberate ignorance of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/1/2013 12:55 AM, spacey12 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 31, 9:10 am, Man of Mind restored:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2013 8:22 AM, Mike Smith wrote:
>........
>>>>>>>>> It proves the planet's weather is controlled by the Sun, not humans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope, that's been debunked for years..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
>>>>>>>> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
>>>>>>>> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
>>>>>>>> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
>>>>>>>> other planets – have nothing to do with global warming."
> other planets – have nothing to do with global warming."
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
>
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
http://www.friendsofscience.org/
>http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
>
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
Mike Smith
Apr 1, 2013, 10:06:47 PM4/1/13
to
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:27:44 -0500, Man of Mind
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/1/2013 5:43 PM, Tracey12 wrote:
>> On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
>..
>>> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes you
>>> are that profoundly stupid.
>>
>> I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
>> earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
>
>Even funnier is how you try to change the subject and/or
>the context of my replies that refute your specious nonsense..
>
>You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
>
>http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
>
> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
> that variations in solar activity � whether on Earth or
<baron.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/1/2013 5:43 PM, Tracey12 wrote:
>> On Apr 1, 7:31 am, "Lee L. Curtis" <clee...@gmail.com> whined:
>..
>>> Of course, you also think the Sun doesn't heat the Earth, so yes you
>>> are that profoundly stupid.
>>
>> I too find it interesting that libs would begin to suggest that the
>> earth is somehow not heated totally by the sun
>
>Even funnier is how you try to change the subject and/or
>the context of my replies that refute your specious nonsense..
>
>You said that the sun controls our climate.. *>LOL!<*
>
>http://www.desmogblog.com/solar-forcing-and-global-warming-here-we-go-again
>
> "[..}perhaps most important, solar irradiance has actually
> been decreasing slightly over the past few years and,
> according to Sigurdsson, is now moving towards a minimum.
> Even disregarding that, climate scientists have long known
> other planets � have nothing to do with global warming."
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
>
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
To a clueless blithering idiot that does not possess any logic, common
>http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11650/dn11650-3_738.jpg
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650
>
> "According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third
> less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been
> steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this
> time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon
> sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason:
> higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the
> sun's heat."
sense, analytical abilities or any form of a rational "critical
thought" process, you would believe the bullshit you posted.
"variations in solar activity whether on Earth or other planets have
nothing to do with global warming." is one of the dumbest statements
ever made about the mythical global warming bullshit.
And I'm betting this fool has no idea that water makes up 95% of all
greenhouse gasses.
Mike Smith
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages