Re: Bleak Prospects for Avoiding Dangerous Global Warming

[BeamMeUpScotty]

> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:15:30 -0400, "BJA...@teranews.com"
> <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>
>> On 10/24/2011 11:53 PM, AGWFacts wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:17:23 -0400, Wally W.<ww8...@aim.com>
>>> wrote:
>
>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:45:27 -0500, Sam Wormley <swor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bleak Prospects for Avoiding Dangerous Global Warming
>>>>
>>>> http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html
>>>>
>>>> "The bad news just got worse: A new study finds that reining in
>>>> greenhouse gas emissions in time to avert serious changes to Earth's
>>>> climate will be at best extremely difficult. Current goals for reducing
>>>> emissions fall far short of what would be needed to keep warming below
>>>> dangerous levels, the study suggests. To succeed, we would most likely
>>>> have to reverse the rise in emissions immediately and follow through
>>>> with steep reductions through the century. Starting later would be far
>>>> more expensive and require unproven technology".
>>>>
>>>> See:
>>>> http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html
>
>>>> OT in sci.physics.
>
>>> Physics is off topic in sci.physics? LOL!
>
>> POLITICS is off topic is sci.physics you moron!


The universe is being explained by physics..... how do you limit the
subject matter here when all matter is physics?


You need to limit your physics to one specialized niche and not discuss
the others but then, all physics is related by the fact they are part of
this universe.


That butterfly effect that the Eco Socialists love so much.

[AGWFacts]

On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:29:49 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:13:24 -0600, AGWFacts <AGWF...@ipcc.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:15:30 -0400, "BJA...@teranews.com"
> > <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On 10/24/2011 11:53 PM, AGWFacts wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:17:23 -0400, Wally W.<ww8...@aim.com>
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:45:27 -0500, Sam Wormley <swor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bleak Prospects for Avoiding Dangerous Global Warming
> > > > >
> > > > > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html
> > > > >
> > > > > "The bad news just got worse: A new study finds that reining in
> > > > > greenhouse gas emissions in time to avert serious changes to Earth's
> > > > > climate will be at best extremely difficult. Current goals for reducing
> > > > > emissions fall far short of what would be needed to keep warming below
> > > > > dangerous levels, the study suggests. To succeed, we would most likely
> > > > > have to reverse the rise in emissions immediately and follow through
> > > > > with steep reductions through the century. Starting later would be far
> > > > > more expensive and require unproven technology".
> > > > >
> > > > > See:
> > > > > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html
> >
> > > >> OT in sci.physics.

> > > > Physics is off topic in sci.physics? LOL!

> > > POLITICS is off topic is sci.physics you moron!

> > And physics? That's fucking hilarious! So what the bloody fuck do
> > you clowns discuss in sci.physics then?

> The universe is being explained by physics..... how do you limit the
> subject matter here when all matter is physics?

"BJA...@teranews.com" claimed physics is off-topic in sci.physics


--
TRUTH NEEDS ALLIES!
http://epa.gov/climatechange/
The government that governs least governs best.