today's big news
bar
forgotten racers ... this is the day's real news:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece
Amit Ghosh
> shut up already about Bos and Impey, Creed, Tyler, and all those long
> forgotten racers ... this is the day's real news:http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece
dumbass,
fo'real
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6040000/newsid_6046900/6046962.stm
bjwe...@gmail.com
The BBC's angle on this was
"1970s lifestyle 'protects planet'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8004257.stm
Because damnit, a planet without skinny hippie chicks
wearing bell bottoms isn't worth saving.
Ben
Susan Walker
> On Apr 20, 6:15 pm, bar wrote:
>> http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece
>
> [...]
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8004257.stm
Thanks, I facebooked it! I'm hip!
cur...@the-md-russells.org
wrote:
>shut up already about Bos and Impey, Creed, Tyler, and all those long
>forgotten racers ... this is the day's real news:
>http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2387203.ece
Not useful without their team kit.
Donald Munro
> The BBC's angle on this was
> "1970s lifestyle 'protects planet'"
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8004257.stm
>
> Because damnit, a planet without skinny hippie chicks wearing bell bottoms
> isn't worth saving.
Is there a US equivalent for:
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7584191.stm>
I'd bet on the south being all red states.
Fred Fredburger
I was out of town and missed last week's facebook discussion thread, and
don't feel like catching up. I feel like I MUST mention this:
Susan Walker
Thanks! I facebooked that too!!
bjwe...@gmail.com
Of course there is an equivalent:
http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/index.htm
and
http://www.astro.umd.edu/~bjw/misc/obesity_vote.gif
As the second plot shows, it's in Democrats'
best interest to bring back skinny hippie chicks.
Go Democrats!
Ben
Henry
we introduced a tax here for green house gases, can't remember how
much per cow.
Got the short shrift very quickly when the farmers got pissy
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0309/S00040.htm
Tom Kunich
news:9c1545d4-3138-4a00...@f41g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> we introduced a tax here for green house gases, can't remember how
> much per cow.
> Got the short shrift very quickly when the farmers got pissy
> http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0309/S00040.htm
The question is - what result did that have?
Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
wrote:
> Of course there is an equivalent:
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/index.htm
>
wow
John Forrest Tomlinson
Oh man, that is so messed up. I was thinking there'd be sound with
it, with some sort of fat person coughing increasing, then at the end
that sound of an EKG when someone flatlines......
Donald Munro
>> > The BBC's angle on this was
>> > "1970s lifestyle 'protects planet'"
>> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8004257.stm
>>
>> > Because damnit, a planet without skinny hippie chicks wearing bell
>> > bottoms isn't worth saving.
Donald Munro wrote:
>> Is there a US equivalent for:
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7584191.stm>
>>
>> I'd bet on the south being all red states.
b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> Of course there is an equivalent:
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/index.htm
Why does Colorado hate America ?
bjwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:22:35 -0700 (PDT), "Kurgan. presented by
>
> >On Apr 21, 4:21 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Of course there is an equivalent:
>
> >> http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/index.htm
>
> >wow
>
> Oh man, that is so messed up. I was thinking there'd be sound with
> it, with some sort of fat person coughing increasing, then at the end
> that sound of an EKG when someone flatlines......
Yeah. Or have the map shaded in greyscale so that
it gradually fades to black as a state gets fatter and fatter.
(Statistically more robust since thresholds of percent
greater than X can be noisy.) Or do one of those
warping cartographic projections, making the states
bigger as they get fatter, as Colorado gradually
disappears.
Chung or anyone, can you find the state-by-state data
that goes into this map? I want to plot individual state
trendlines. For example, to address Donald's question
of how Colorado hates America - does it have a
slower increase of obesity, or is it just offset to a
lower %age?
I have heard of this issue before but I'm still kinda
surprised at how big the increase is over only
a 20 year period.
Ben
Susan Walker
I'll say!
Henry
> "Henry" <snogfest_hosebe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
the legislation never got passed, no tax = happy farmers but man, do
we (as a country) produce a lot of greenhouse gases!
Carl Sundquist
Sheep don't fart?
Tom Kunich
>
> the legislation never got passed, no tax = happy farmers but man, do
> we (as a country) produce a lot of greenhouse gases!
Henry, I suggest you learn about it instead of listening to morons
pretending to know about CO2's effects.
John Forrest Tomlinson
<bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/index.htm
>>
> Or do one of those
>warping cartographic projections, making the states
>bigger as they get fatter, as Colorado gradually
>disappears.
Funny.
bjwe...@gmail.com
> "Henry" <snogfest_hosebe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
It's "morans" goddamnit.
Your Radiative Transfer Professor,
Dr. Ben
Robert Chung
> Chung or anyone, can you find the state-by-state data
> that goes into this map?
I think you have to go to the original BRFSS data from the CDC. They have a
little web query tool that exports the data in pre-defined categories. Or,
you can download the huge datasets and calculate it yourself.
Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
> "Henry" <snogfest_hosebe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
http://www.am.ub.es/~jmiralda/fsgw/lect3.html
The radiative forcing from each greenhouse gas
The importance of each greenhouse gas for climate is measured by its
contribution to the radiative forcing .
What is radiative forcing?
Radiative forcing is the amount by which a variation in the abundance
of a greenhouse gas, compared to its abundance in pre-industrial
times, changes the radiation energy budget of the Earth, if we change
the abundance of the greenhouse gas but we do not alter the
temperature and other properties of the surface and the troposphere.
For example, we know from our energy budget diagram in page 17 that
the surface emits 114% of the incoming solar energy. This is 342x1.14
= 390 Watts per square meter. But because the atmosphere absorbs some
infrared radiation, only 69%, or 342x0.69 = 237 Watts per square meter
are actually emitted to space. If we now increase the abundance of
carbon dioxide, the atmosphere becomes more opaque and even less
infrared energy is emitted to space. For the case of the increase of
carbon dioxide from 270 ppmv in pre-industrial times to 370 ppmv
today, the outgoing infrared energy is reduced by 1.5 Watts per
square. So the change in carbon dioxide has produced a radiative
forcing of 1.5 Watts per square meter.
The radiative forcings have been calculated for all the greenhouse
gases as a function of their abundance. These calculations are done by
computing the way the radiation at each wavelength is absorbed and
reradiated at different layers in the atmosphere, until it escapes to
space. The present radiative forcings of each greenhouse gas (compared
to their greenhouse effects in pre-industrial times) are:
Carbon dioxide: 1.5 Watts per square meter.
Methane: 0.5 Watts per square meter.
Nitrous oxide: 0.2 Watts per square meter.
Halocarbons: 0.2 Watts per square meter.
Total from all greenhouse gases: 2.4 Watts per square meter.
Hence, at present carbon dioxide is responsible for 60% of the
anthropogenic greenhouse effect, methane is responsible for 20%,
nitrous oxide for 10%, and halocarbons for 10%. The total radiative
forcing of 2.4 Watts per square meter is equivalent to 1% of all the
energy absorbed from sunlight in the surface and atmosphere of the
Earth, at present, and it will increase as greenhouse gas abundances
increase in the future.
In more popular physical units, the total radiative forcing is 10000
Watts for every acre of land or ocean in the Earth. This means that,
if you take an acre of land or ocean anywhere in the Earth, the
present anthropogenic greenhouse effect results in warming that is
equivalent to what we would get if we had an electric heater of 10000
Watts turned on all the time, warming the surface and the air near the
surface.
The calculations of the total radiative forcing from anthropogenic
greenhouse gas has been determined to be accurate to 10%. Any errors
in our knowledge of the absorption properties of the molecules or
their distribution in the atmosphere could change the total radiative
forcing only in the range between 2.2 and 2.7 Watts per square meter.
Ryan Cousineau
Susan Walker <myful...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
Be nice! You got banned from the other rbr this way.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcou...@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
Henry
> "Henry" <snogfest_hosebe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
methane isn't a greenhouse gas ?
I'm a dumbass ignorant (lazy, horny, selfish, stupid) global warming
denier.
Henry
only 1 stomach?
Donald Munro
>> Henry, I suggest you learn about it instead of listening to morons
>> pretending to know about CO2's effects.
b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> Your Radiative Transfer Professor,
> Dr. Ben
Statistics and thermodynamics make good bedfellows.
Donald Munro
>> Or do one of those warping cartographic projections, making the states
>> bigger as they get fatter, as Colorado gradually disappears.
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> Funny.
Colorado, the Alamo where thin people make their final stand before being
crushed into oblivion.
cur...@the-md-russells.org
<snogfest_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>cows don't produce methane ?
>methane isn't a greenhouse gas ?
>I'm a dumbass ignorant (lazy, horny, selfish, stupid) global warming
>denier.
Big deal. My pannier is 1000 denier.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Donald Munro
>>I'm a dumbass ignorant (lazy, horny, selfish, stupid) global warming
>>denier.
curtis wrote:
> Big deal. My pannier is 1000 denier.
Your pannier might get invited to the next UN racism conference.
Henry
> On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:03:47 -0700 (PDT), Henry
>
> >cows don't produce methane ?
> >methane isn't a greenhouse gas ?
> >I'm a dumbass ignorant (lazy, horny, selfish, stupid) global warming
> >denier.
>
> Big deal. My pannier is 1000 denier.
Paul G.
Apparently sheep do, but kangaroos don't:
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2023371.stm>
Carl Sundquist
That explains Masters Fatties. Multiple stomachs.
Donald Munro
>> > Sheep don't fart?
Henry wrote:
>> only 1 stomach?
Carl Sundquist wrote:
> That explains Masters Fatties. Multiple stomachs.
So the question is do real FMs have more chins than stomachs or
more stomachs than chins.