Al Those Great Scientists Here
Tom Kunich
individual scientists from 325 separate research institutions in 38
different countries ... and counting!
dave a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_warm_period
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) states that
the "idea of a global or hemispheric "Medieval Warm Period" that was
warmer than today however, has turned out to be incorrect" and that what
those "records that do exist show is that there was no multi-century
periods when global or hemispheric temperatures were the same or warmer
than in the 20th century". Indeed, global temperature records taken from
ice cores, tree rings, and lake deposits, have shown that the Earth was
actually slightly cooler (by 0.03 degrees Celsius) during the 'Medieval
Warm Period' than in the early- and mid-20th century.
your friend in science
/dave a
Tom Kunich
news:fvr4q...@news1.newsguy.com...
So NOAA trumps 532 scientists. Who knew?
b...@mambo.ucolick.org
> "dave a" <blkcatREMOVET...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Kun-Kun,
Your original post doesn't sound like something
a person would just write and post to Usenet. In fact,
a simple Google reveals that you cut-and-pasted it
from http://www.co2science.org/ , which is a step up
from stealing your material from couplescompany.com,
though it's just a slickly designed climate
disinformation website. Most people agree there was
a Medieval Warm Period, they just don't agree that it
means what "co2science.org" wants it to mean.
Still, not quoting and naming your sources is plagiarism
by most university standards. I'm afraid I'm going to
have to give you zero credit for your term paper and
you're going to fail the class. But I don't think this
case rises to the level of reporting as an honor code
violation, so the Dean and I have agreed that you
can stay enrolled for the fall semester. I'm going to
recommend that you try "Rocks for Jocks" rather than
taking Professor Asher's earth sciences class for
your distribution requirement, though.
Ben
Howard Kveck
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote:
What? No Double Secret Probation?!?!?! I'm shocked at how lax this institution has
become.
--
tanx,
Howard
Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Donald Munro
> I'm going to recommend that you try "Rocks for Jocks"
> rather than taking Professor Asher's earth sciences class for your
> distribution requirement, though.
No doubt Professor Asher will be glad to hear he won't be pushing
any more rocks up a mountain in the underworld.
William Asher
news:YOURhoward-9D349...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
>
> What? No Double Secret Probation?!?!?! I'm shocked at how lax this
> institution has become.
>
I'm sitting here wondering who the fuck Al is.
--
Bill Asher
p.s. If anyone gives a crap, the IPCC AR4, Chap. 6 has a nice discussion
of the "MWP" that can be found on p 468:
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch06.pdf
The key point, as Ben mentioned, was the best data indicate it was a) not
as warm on average as we are observing today and b) not a synchronous
global warming like we are observing today.
Figure 6.10 on p 467 is a very good summary of hemispheric temperature
reconstructions for the last two millenia.
William Asher
$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com:
>
> No doubt Professor Asher will be glad to hear he won't be pushing
> any more rocks up a mountain in the underworld.
>
That stuff is for Sisyphuses anyway.
--
Bill Asher
Tom Kunich
news:d1a87038-4d69-4314...@w34g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Most people agree there was
> a Medieval Warm Period, they just don't agree that it
> means what "co2science.org" wants it to mean.
Well, Benny, good old CO2Science is so bad that some of your buddies
attacked it and tried to erase all of the data. Too bad for people like you
that actual records and papers prove you wrong most of the time.
But it's all right with me if you want to pretend to be knowledgeable about
something you know nothing about.
Robert Chung
NO, according to some of those 500+ scientists:
http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scientists-with-documented-doubts-about-the-heartland-institute
John Everett
I just looked at the web site cited above and it's clearly right out
of the Rush Limbaugh School of Climate Science.
--
jeverett3<AT>sbcglobal<DOT>net (John V. Everett)
John Everett
>Howard Kveck <YOURh...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in
>news:YOURhoward-9D349...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
>
>>
>> What? No Double Secret Probation?!?!?! I'm shocked at how lax this
>> institution has become.
>>
>
>I'm sitting here wondering who the fuck Al is.
Gore of course!
Tom Kunich
news:79e117f9-8f78-4c19...@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Well then Robert - what are you doing to save the earth?
Tom Kunich
news:4he324dqc5l0g05tm...@4ax.com...
>
> I just looked at the web site cited above and it's clearly right out
> of the Rush Limbaugh School of Climate Science.
I like your science:
"we do not currently have any convincing evidence or observations of
significant climate change from other than natural causes." Frederick Seitz
President Emeritus, Rockefeller University, Past President, National Academy
of Sciences, Past President, American Physical Society, Chairman, Science
and Environmental Policy Project
The fact is that there are hundreds of scientists that have signed onto the
Kyoto Protocols and backed the IPCC who haven't the slightest training nor
education in the questions at hand. And of course those same sort of
uneducated dolts such as our own Benny here are perfectly willing to support
politicians who promise policies which would essentially cause mass societal
destruction and starvation of the third world.
But just go right ahead and believe people screaming that you have to throw
all of your money at them and then live like a pauper. Seems like your kind
of thinking.
RicodJour
> "Robert Chung" <rech...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > On May 6, 6:57 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >> Was there a Medieval Warm Period? YES, according to data published by 532
> >> individual scientists from 325 separate research institutions in 38
> >> different countries ... and counting!
>
> > NO, according to some of those 500+ scientists:
>
>
> Well then Robert - what are you doing to save the earth?
Let's see. You plagiarize a portion of a reactionary site's article
that apparently uses a bot to collect climate scientists names at
random and stick them on a list, which is beyond stupid for them and a
ME TOO! I'M WITH STUPID! for you. That about sum it up?
I'm getting fed up waiting for the Kun-bot upgrade. It's long
overdue. I'm afraid that the Alzheimer's organizations are going to
have the current one removed for being demeaning to real people with
real memory problems. Is there an open source Kun-bot project in the
works? Please let me know where to PayPal my three dollars.
R
Donald Munro
> I'm getting fed up waiting for the Kun-bot upgrade. It's long overdue.
> I'm afraid that the Alzheimer's organizations are going to have the
> current one removed for being demeaning to real people with real memory
> problems. Is there an open source Kun-bot project in the works? Please
> let me know where to PayPal my three dollars.
The open source version is going to be embedded into a
powermeter and programmed to attack Iran when it takes
a natural break.
Paul G.
> Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote innews:YOURhoward-9D349...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
Uh... there is a GLARING error there- how can it be true that "It is
very likely that the current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (379
ppm) and CH4 (1,774 ppb) exceed by far the natural range of the last
650 kyr" when according to right wing biblical experts the earth is
only 6000 years old? See how easy that was? No need to go to the
trouble and expense of fooling around with core samples. If you need
any more help with scientific facts me and Kuntitch will be happy to
help. This global warming nonsense is as absurd as the idea that
Kuntitch evolved from primitive simians. If anything, primitive
simians evolved from Kuntitch.
-Paul
Robert Chung
> "Robert Chung" <rech...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:79e117f9-8f78-4c19...@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 6, 6:57 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >> Was there a Medieval Warm Period? YES, according to data published by 532
> >> individual scientists from 325 separate research institutions in 38
> >> different countries ... and counting!
>
> > NO, according to some of those 500+ scientists:
>
>
> Well then Robert - what are you doing to save the earth?
Hmmm. Well, in matters like these I try to start with little steps.
Pointing out how foolish you are is almost always a reasonable
beginning.
dusto...@mac.com
> And of course those same sort of
Mirror time, TK (IRT the usual bail-out when your game is called on
you-- this time, a "source" getting both its titties caught in the
proverbial wringer)!
Where was it you got your engineering degree from, again? What year?
TIA! --D-y
Donald Munro
> If anything, primitive simians evolved from Kuntitch.
Degenerative Genetic Algorithms (DGA) is a trademark of SchwartzSoft.
William Asher
Here's how typical climate skeptics stack up against real climate
physicists in terms of their h-indeces:
The question, if you calculate the h-index for a group of well-known, well-
funded, and well-fed from the look of them climate skeptics and compared
that to the h-index for a group of similar climate scientists, would there
be any significant difference? (Sidebar: the h-index is one measure of a
scientist's productivity over his/her career and tracks the impact their
publications have in terms of citations. There is a wikipedia entry on the
h-index, googling h-index will turn it up. It is also discussed on the ISI
website.) So, I took the staff of WorldClimateReport.com (Michaels,
Balling, Davies, Knappenberger (all well-known skeptics)) and compared
their h-indeces to the staff of RealClimate.org (Schmidt, Mann, Ammann,
Archer, Benestad, BRadley, Connolley, Rahmstorf, Steig, deGaridel-Thoron
(maybe not so well-known climate physicists and chemists)). One issue with
this approach is that the h-index for a scientist will rise over time.
This puts younger scientists at a disadvantage to older scientists so I
also computed the average h-index for each divided by the years since Ph.D.
(the result being the average rise in h-index over time (ISI claims for
physicists that a value of 1 for this ratio signifies normal scientific
productivity (the ratio is higher for biomedical sciences, somewhat lower
for other sciences, but 1 is a good ballpark number)). Here are the
results (all h-indeces compiled using ISI's Web of Science):
WorldClimateReport (Skeptics)
Name....................h-index....PhD Yr...........h-index/(yrs since PhD)
P.J.Michaels.............11........1979..............0.38
R.C.Balling Jr...........19........1979..............0.66
P.C.Knappenberger.........9........1992..............0.56
R.E.Davies...............13........1979..............0.65
Average...................13.........................0.56
RealClimate.org (Climate scientists)
Name..............h-index.........PhD Yr..............h-index/yrssincePhD
Schmidt............18.............1996..............1.5
Mann...............29.............1998..............2.9
Ammann.............17.............2002..............2.8
Archer.............24.............1990..............1.3
Benestad...........8..............1997..............0.73
Bradley............31.............1974..............0.91
Connolley..........14.............1996..............1.2
deGaridel-Thoron...5..............2002..............0.83
Rahmstorf..........22.............1990..............1.2
Steig..............24.............1995..............1.85
Average............18...............................1.53
So it's a landslide to RealClimate.org in terms of scientific productivity.
Their average h-index normalized over their careers is a factor of three
greater than the skeptics. This is why the skeptics are simply getting
savaged scientifically. They just aren't good scientists, they're just
media whores who do just enough science to maintain credibility.
CO2Science is run by the Idso family. Craig Idso has an h-index of 5 and a
yearly average of 0.5. Keith Idso has an h-index of 4 and a yearly average
of 0.16. Sherwood Idso (daddy) has an h-index of 43 for an average of
1.05 (I guess we know who weilds the big stick in that clan eh?), so he is
comparable to the guys at realclimate.org, but that is a rare exception
among skeptics. Fred Seitz, who you cite as an authority, has an h-index
of 14 but has a career spanning over 50 years so his average is very low
(you can't argue that he did most of his work early either since most of
his publications are in the back half of his career (when he became a
climate skeptic)).
It's not that people like Ben or I are pretending to be knowledgable, it's
that the skeptics are pretending to be knowledgable. Why people like you
and Jack can't figure out that you are being used as inflatable sheep with
life-like sucking mouth action is something I cannot figure out.
--
Bill Asher
William Asher
> Uh... there is a GLARING error there- how can it be true that "It is
> very likely that the current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (379
> ppm) and CH4 (1,774 ppb) exceed by far the natural range of the last
> 650 kyr" when according to right wing biblical experts the earth is
> only 6000 years old? See how easy that was? No need to go to the
> trouble and expense of fooling around with core samples. If you need
> any more help with scientific facts me and Kuntitch will be happy to
> help. This global warming nonsense is as absurd as the idea that
> Kuntitch evolved from primitive simians. If anything, primitive
> simians evolved from Kuntitch.
> -Paul
Right. I keep forgetting the planet was created to make us think it was
obeying laws of physics to test our faith in god.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUW1SGF7bR8
--
Bill Asher
William Asher
Not according to Schwartz. It's more like donating money to the EDF, which
only guarantees you'll be asked to donate more money to the EDF.
--
Bill Asher
Tom Kunich
news:cd8444e3-6721-4a43...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 7, 10:00 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> And of course those same sort of uneducated dolts (snip)
>
> Mirror time, TK (IRT the usual bail-out when your game is called on
> you-- this time, a "source" getting both its titties caught in the
> proverbial wringer)!
Let me see, if I claim that people who are making absolutely false claims
about climate change aren't qualified you insist that I need to be
qualified?
> Where was it you got your engineering degree from, again? What year?
USAF 1963, why?
Tom Kunich
> On May 7, 7:50 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>>
>> Well then Robert - what are you doing to save the earth?
>
> Hmmm. Well, in matters like these I try to start with little steps.
Yet you don't seem to be able to demonstrate that you do anything at all.
Let's put together the sort of question which is what you really need to
answer -
How many people are you willing to falsely discredit, financially destroy or
murder in order to get your way?
William Asher
>
> How many people are you willing to falsely discredit, financially
> destroy or murder in order to get your way?
>
>
Can we also tap their women?
--
Bill Asher
Sandy
news:79e117f9-8f78-4c19...@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Robert Chung <rec...@gmail.com> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
Delegates or popular votes?
Sandy
William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
EDF - Électricité de France ???
Robert Chung
One of my governor's best lines:
Mongol General: We won again! This is good, but what is best in life?
Mongol: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the
wind in your hair.
Mongol General: Wrong! Conan! What is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear
the lamentations of the women.
Donald Munro
>> How many people are you willing to falsely discredit, financially
>> destroy or murder in order to get your way?
I didn't realize climate scientists received CIA training.
William Asher wrote:
> Can we also tap their women?
Kunich thinks we're all gay so he isn't worried about that (although
he might be worried if he knew you to be a Jedi knight dabbling in the
back side of the Force).
William Asher
William Asher
> EDF - Électricité de France ???
Environmental Defense Fund.
--
Bill Asher
Robert Chung
> > One of my governor's best lines:
>
> > Mongol General: We won again! This is good, but what is best in life?
> > Mongol: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the
> > wind in your hair.
> > Mongol General: Wrong! Conan! What is best in life?
> > Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear
> > the lamentations of the women.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V30tyaXv6EI
Ah. Thanks. I stand corrected:
"...to hear the lamentation of de vimmen."
SLAVE of THE STATE
If it cuts into your afternoon training rides, I'd say you have
misplaced priorities.
William Asher
> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> How many people are you willing to falsely discredit, financially
>>> destroy or murder in order to get your way?
>
> I didn't realize climate scientists received CIA training.
The way to think about it is that if you fail the climate scientist
subterfuge, intrigue, and mayhem aptitude test the CIA will take you. Once
you enroll in climate scientist training, you either graduate, or are never
heard from again. Sort of like assassin school in Ankh-Morpork, only
without the training in culture and dancing.
> William Asher wrote:
>> Can we also tap their women?
>
> Kunich thinks we're all gay so he isn't worried about that (although
> he might be worried if he knew you to be a Jedi knight dabbling in the
> back side of the Force).
It kind of makes you wonder what a Jedi page thinks of their chosen
profession as their master dabbles in the back side with force. Or not.
--
Bill Asher
William Asher
It is a cinema classic, regardless of the trivial details. Right up there
with:
Terminator: Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.
Clerk: Hey, just what you see pal.
--
Bill Asher
SLAVE of THE STATE
> p.s. If anyone gives a crap, ...
At this point, the most important thing is not the correctness of the
physical science, but of the social science. The uncertainty is
vanishing when it comes to the question of whether or not sufficient
(and "important") people give a crap about the more important
questions raised by social science and the implications.
Is there a list to sign for "scientists unconcerned about AGW?"
How about a list for "scientists concerned about retards with
political power?"
"I think a major reason why intellectuals tend to move towards
collectivism is that the collectivist answer is a simple one. If
there’s something wrong, pass a law and do something about it." --
Milton Friedman
"The great differences between the characteristic methods of the
physical sciences and those of the social sciences explain why the
natural scientist who turns to the work of the professional students
of social phenomena so often feels that he has got among a company of
people who habitually commit all the mortal sins which he is most
careful to avoid, and that a science of society conforming to his
standards does not yet exist." -- Hayek, _The Counter-Revolution of
Science, Studies on the Abuse of Reason_
Tom Kunich
news:96a59e86-8221-4732...@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> "I think a major reason why intellectuals tend to move towards
> collectivism is that the collectivist answer is a simple one. If
> there's something wrong, pass a law and do something about it." --
> Milton Friedman
Let's not forget that those here who think of themselves as "Liberals" are
more than willing to support absolutely fascist techniques to get their way.
On TV, Al Gore and Ted Turner have stated that the whole world is going to
die unless we are willing to murder more than half of them. And they
advocate methods of that murder.
Sandy
>
>> EDF - Électricité de France ???
>
> Environmental Defense Fund.
Subsidiary?
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
He's right. But they all are.
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
Paul G.
This is why I'm a liberal. That doesn't sound all that fun to me. No,
for me the best in life is a long bike ride on a cold day, followed by
drinking a cold Dos Equis beer while taking a hot shower, a "nap",
followed by a nap, maybe another "nap", etc... Lamentations are not
what I want to hear from my women. That would Interfere with my
napping, not to mention my "napping".
-Paul
Paul G.
A 40 watt pulse rifle??! That's ridiculous. I use a 100 watt pulse
rifle just to shoot starlings in my cherry trees. Who writes this
crap?
-Paul
William Asher
> On May 7, 12:52 am, William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> p.s. If anyone gives a crap, ...
>
> At this point, the most important thing is not the correctness of the
> physical science, but of the social science. The uncertainty is
> vanishing when it comes to the question of whether or not sufficient
> (and "important") people give a crap about the more important
> questions raised by social science and the implications.
I've never seen "correctness" used as an adjective describing "social
science" before. Interesting concept. I guess the second quote from Salma
Hyek explains that.
The social and economic science of climate change is really very simple, to
avoid making any sacrifices during our lifetimes, most of us are betting
that the really bad effects will occur after we are dead.
--
Bill Asher
William Asher
You're a liberal, nobody expects you to know anything about weaponry so
it's not surprising you are completely overgunned. Anyway, those were
purple martins, not starlings. Nice going.
--
Bill Asher
Paul G.
>
> The social and economic science of climate change is really very simple, to
> avoid making any sacrifices during our lifetimes, most of us are betting
> that the really bad effects will occur after we are dead.
>
Well said. I've been musing- when did "conservative" become synonymous
with "wasteful" and "reckless"? They used to be antonyms. Not any
more...
-Paul
Donald Munro
>> A 40 watt pulse rifle??! That's ridiculous. I use a 100 watt pulse
>> rifle just to shoot starlings in my cherry trees. Who writes this crap?
>> -Paul
William Asher wrote:
> You're a liberal, nobody expects you to know anything about weaponry so
> it's not surprising you are completely overgunned. Anyway, those were
> purple martins, not starlings. Nice going.
There's another liberal around here who'd like to borrow the pulse rifle
to shoot some pesky peace doves.
Paul G.
Over gunned... no way! Look at it like this: we have a president
who's the equivalent of a 25 watt bulb. Four times that is just
enough to take out a starling without upsetting the neighbors.
-Paul
Fred Fredburger
>
>> p.s. If anyone gives a crap, ...
>
> At this point, the most important thing is not the correctness of the
> physical science, but of the social science. The uncertainty is
> vanishing when it comes to the question of whether or not sufficient
> (and "important") people give a crap about the more important
> questions raised by social science and the implications.
>
> Is there a list to sign for "scientists unconcerned about AGW?"
>
> How about a list for "scientists concerned about retards with
> political power?"
>
There appear to be only 2 prevalent views on this topic:
1. Global warming is occurring AND it'll be disastrous AND it's caused
by humans AND it's caused by CO2 from burning fossil fuels AND the
government ought to do something.
2. Global warming is not occurring AND it'll be good for some of us AND
humans cause no harm to the environment AND humans aren't increasing the
amount of CO2 in the atmosphere AND government ought to butt out.
Retards without political power are annoying too.
SLAVE of THE STATE
Your response exemplifies why you scare me more than AGW.
SLAVE of THE STATE
<FredFredbur...@Where.Are.The.Nachos> wrote:
> Retards without political power are annoying too.
But they don't legally steal.
The non-prevalent view powerpoint slide for Mr. Mambo:
1. For all I know, AGW could be real (or not).
2. For all I know, projected dire consequences could be true (or not).
3. The people who screech about global warming are scarier (definitely
true) than global warming (if true) and its consequences (if true).
dusto...@mac.com
> <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cd8444e3-6721-4a43...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 7, 10:00 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > And of course those same sort of uneducated dolts (snip)
>
> > Mirror time, TK (IRT the usual bail-out when your game is called on
> > you-- this time, a "source" getting both its titties caught in the
> > proverbial wringer)!
>
> Let me see, if I claim that people who are making absolutely false claims
> about climate change aren't qualified you insist that I need to be
> qualified?
The list is phony. Maybe not Rovian, but a good smear (lie)
nonetheless.
Hint: you can tell that some of those on the list don't agree with the
standpoint of the list-makers because they ask (some in no uncertain
terms) that their names be removed from said list.
We could wonder how many of the names on the list would in fact demand
to be removed if they even knew in the first place that their names
had been placed on the list. --D-y
Tom Kunich
news:UIadnZFKwK-oo7_V...@comcast.com...
>
> Retards without political power are annoying too.
You're a retard without much of anything:
Global warming MAY be occurring - if so it is a natural process that man has
essentially no connection to. More than likely it is nothing more than
another warming phase caused by the sun. The fact is that historically we're
on the edge of another ice age.
While humans MAY be increasing the CO2 content in the atmosphere, it is a
tiny amount compared to natural processes and all of human history's
addition can be more than doubled with a single grand volcanic eruption.
The government and its outlying freaks are interested ONLY in gaining power
by declaring emergencies where none exist.
Those here that are crying Global Warming are mentally deranged idiots who
would like nothing more than to see mankind in ashes. They are willing to
cry wolf because they're the sort of losers who do such things.
Tom Kunich
news:ad8ee411-fe7b-47aa...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> The list is phony. Maybe not Rovian, but a good smear (lie)
> nonetheless.
>
> Hint: you can tell that some of those on the list don't agree with the
> standpoint of the list-makers because they ask (some in no uncertain
> terms) that their names be removed from said list.
I've got news for you - MANY scientists asked for their names to be removed
from the UN document because not only did they NOT agree with the findings
but the committee management even stated that they changed the papers to
suit their opinions.
Funny you didn't make anything out of that.
Fred Fredburger
You've got a point here.
Fred Fredburger
> "Fred Fredburger" <FredFre...@Where.Are.The.Nachos> wrote in message
> news:UIadnZFKwK-oo7_V...@comcast.com...
>>
>> Retards without political power are annoying too.
>
> You're a retard without much of anything:
Ah! Glad you got your obligatory insult out of the way up front!
> Global warming MAY be occurring - if so it is a natural process that man
> has essentially no connection to. More than likely it is nothing more
> than another warming phase caused by the sun. The fact is that
> historically we're on the edge of another ice age.
>
> While humans MAY be increasing the CO2 content in the atmosphere, it is
> a tiny amount compared to natural processes and all of human history's
> addition can be more than doubled with a single grand volcanic eruption.
>
> The government and its outlying freaks are interested ONLY in gaining
> power by declaring emergencies where none exist.
>
> Those here that are crying Global Warming are mentally deranged idiots
> who would like nothing more than to see mankind in ashes. They are
> willing to cry wolf because they're the sort of losers who do such things.
>
I don't know about all that, but I agree that some of the proposals for
solving the "problem" would be destructive. I wouldn't be surprised if
temperature changes are found have more to do with land use than is
generally believed. Not that I'm claiming expertise here, I'm mostly
distrustful of easy explanations. Those 2 viewpoints that keep showing
up look suspiciously like opposing strawmen than anything else.
Tom Kunich
news:xP-dnURjaapB0r_V...@comcast.com...
>
> I don't know about all that, but I agree that some of the proposals for
> solving the "problem" would be destructive.
Just try listening to these nutjobs talking. Ted Turner has gone so far as
to say that we ought to be GLAD that disease is killing so many in Africa.
Al Gore has hinted that we ought to stop feeding the world.
On TV one nutjob said that we ought to stop ALL electrical generation in the
USA. What do you suppose that would do?
The fact is that these people are pushing policies that would end up in
massive amounts of death.
If you prefer to ally yourself with people like that don't be surprised when
someone takes extreme actions against them and includes you.
Oh, wait, I'M the bad guy because I don't agree with the great climate
scientists here.
Howard Kveck
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "SLAVE of THE STATE" <gwh...@ti.com> wrote in message
> news:96a59e86-8221-4732...@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > "I think a major reason why intellectuals tend to move towards
> > collectivism is that the collectivist answer is a simple one. If
> > there's something wrong, pass a law and do something about it." --
> > Milton Friedman
>
> Let's not forget that those here who think of themselves as "Liberals" are
> more than willing to support absolutely fascist techniques to get their way.
"Fascist" - I don't think that word means what you think it does.
> On TV, Al Gore and Ted Turner have stated that the whole world is going to
> die unless we are willing to murder more than half of them. And they
> advocate methods of that murder.
You have the most vivid imagination, Tommy.
--
tanx,
Howard
Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Robert Chung
> Just try listening to these nutjobs talking.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2008/March/SecurityBeat.htm#Science
Mike Jacoubowsky
>> a Medieval Warm Period, they just don't agree that it
>> means what "co2science.org" wants it to mean.
>
> Well, Benny, good old CO2Science is so bad that some of your buddies
> attacked it and tried to erase all of the data. Too bad for people like
> you that actual records and papers prove you wrong most of the time.
But you see, that's exactly the problem. Being right "most" of the time
doesn't cut it when that one time you're wrong, it's fatal. So that's why we
go out of our way (or should anyway) to minimize even the possibility that
that far-fetched idea could actually have something to it.
Tom, something I learned a while ago has served me quite well. The more
certain I am that I'm right about something, the more likely it is that I'm
wrong. Always take the other side seriously. Consider that maybe there's
some reason they believe the goofy things they do. And consider that a
healthy dose of crow, eaten every once in a while, is a normal part of a
healthy life.
If you haven't seen it yet, rent "The Fog of War." I recommend it to
everyone. Great piece of work, regardless of what you thought/think of
Robert McNamara.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Tom Kunich
news:9812054a-bd9d-4165...@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On May 7, 6:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> Just try listening to these nutjobs talking.
>
> http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2008/March/SecurityBeat.htm#Science
I'm really impressed. You're offering ADVICE from science fiction writers as
equal to politicians demanding that we take actions that would essentially
murder a significant portion of our population as well as the world's.
The really strange part of this is that you're supposed to be an educated
man and you don't seem able to tell the difference between those two.
Fred Fredburger
> Al Gore has hinted that we ought to stop feeding the world.
>
I'm not sure it's "our" responsibility to do that but it's OK with me if
we do. It's all about balancing priorities appropriately. So far, I've
seen little in the way of actual policy proposals that address this. I
suspect politicians know they'd be destroying their careers if they
advocated policies that dealt with CO2 emissions in s substantiative way.
The actual policy proposals sound more like:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=7467
This proposal does nothing to discourage CO2 emissions and arguably
encourages it to the extent that prices are held down and assuming any
kind of price elasticity to gasoline demand.
I'm not trying to pick on Hillary or her proposal, I'm just think it's
typical of what you can expect from any politician. They like creating
the appearance they're doing you a favor, they're unlikely to ask you to
sacrifice.
Fred Fredburger
> If you haven't seen it yet, rent "The Fog of War." I recommend it to
> everyone. Great piece of work, regardless of what you thought/think of
> Robert McNamara.
That's a great movie. Not as one sided as a lot of documentaries.
Fred Fredburger
> "I think a major reason why intellectuals tend to move towards
> collectivism is that the collectivist answer is a simple one. If
> there’s something wrong, pass a law and do something about it." --
> Milton Friedman
Saves the trouble of having to convince "retards".
Donald Munro
On TV, Al Gore and Ted Turner have stated that the whole world is going
>> to die unless we are willing to murder more than half of them. And they
>> advocate methods of that murder.
Howard Kveck wrote:
> You have the most vivid imagination, Tommy.
Just exercising the drama queen module.
Donald Munro
> Psst - MOST "climate scientists" deny "global warming".
Robert Chung wrote:
> Hmmm. Well, in matters like these I try to start with little steps.
> Pointing out how foolish you are is almost always a reasonable beginning.
I think you may have bitten off more than you can chew. Although the
voyeur in Schwartz might enjoy your attempts.
b...@mambo.ucolick.org
> <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote in message
>
> news:d1a87038-4d69-4314...@w34g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Most people agree there was
> > a Medieval Warm Period, they just don't agree that it
> > means what "co2science.org" wants it to mean.
>
> Well, Benny, good old CO2Science is so bad that some of your buddies
> attacked it and tried to erase all of the data. Too bad for people like you
> that actual records and papers prove you wrong most of the time.
>
> something you know nothing about.
Tom, every time you come up with some random
argument, you say stuff about "actual records and
papers" and then are hard pressed to come up
with references. Then you start throwing insults,
which is cool - this is RBR after all - but you need to
come up with some new ones. I didn't give you any
references myself, this time, because you plagiarized the
original quote (I'm serious about calling that plagiarism,
you know) and because I don't have time to correct
all of your CO2 radiative transfer homework, much less
hack into co2science.org, since I'm busy killing half
the world's population. It's hard work even for trained
professionals.
Sincerely,
Keyser Soze (Dr.)
b...@mambo.ucolick.org
One man's impending catastrophe is another
man's hysteria. Perhaps I feel about global warming
the way you feel about creeping statism; perhaps
what both of us write on the subjects looks like
screeching to an outsider.
But I'm not writing to screech about what should be done
(statistly or otherwise) about global warming. I have
opinions, of course, but how best to do something, if it
should or can be done, is really a question of implementation
that economists can try to figure out. My opinions on that
aren't terribly informed, so it's up to you, Krugman, and
Salma Hayek to figure it out. The only part of my opinions
that are moderately informed are on the evidence,
which is actually fairly solid.
I just don't like seeing the "well, we have to look at both
sides of the argument" when one side is Senator Inhofe
obfuscation and wishful thinking. There are people
(powerful people, not Kunich people) who
are perfectly happy to deny the facts when they don't
behave as desired, and those people are willing to
screw the reality-based community on many subjects,
not just climate change. So I don't feel comfortable
washing my hands of the argument just because I'm
not a climate scientist.
Ben
Bill C
> On May 7, 6:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > Just try listening to these nutjobs talking.
>
From following several authors, and talking with several, and serious,
responsible fans, such as the folks at alt.fan.heinlein this was to be
expected. There are feuds still going on over fity plus year old 2
column reviews, or comments at conventions and such, and are still
vicious when they pop up. The Hatfield-McCoy thing had nothing on
these folks and their wounded egos. Niven's comments aren't nice, but
probably would be effective, people, and not just hispanics, or any
other group, all of them, will believe just about anything.:
http://www.local6.com/news/16169506/detail.html
Fla. Teacher Accused Of Wizardry
Man Made Toothpick Vanish In Class
POSTED: 10:15 pm EDT May 5, 2008
UPDATED: 12:39 pm EDT May 7, 2008
LAND 'O LAKES, Fla. -- A substitute teacher in Pasco County has lost
his job after being accused of wizardry.
Bill C
Tom Kunich
news:9ec6f396-1170-42f2...@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> Tom, every time you come up with some random
> argument, you say stuff about "actual records and
> papers" and then are hard pressed to come up
> with references.
Well you'll either have to just get used to that or find your own
references. I'm simply not going to provide them for you to simply poo-poo
without any basis as you did CO2Science. In short - you don't like it? Don't
read it.
> I didn't give you any references myself, this time,
Like that's something new?
Donald Munro
> Fla. Teacher Accused Of Wizardry
> Man Made Toothpick Vanish In Class
>
> POSTED: 10:15 pm EDT May 5, 2008
> UPDATED: 12:39 pm EDT May 7, 2008
>
>
> LAND 'O LAKES, Fla. -- A substitute teacher in Pasco County has lost his
> job after being accused of wizardry.
Can he make Kunich disappear ?
Bob Schwartz
Anyone with root can do that.
Bob Schwartz
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
"reality-based community"---I love it! When do we move?
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
dusto...@mac.com
> <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote in message
>
> news:9ec6f396-1170-42f2...@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Tom, every time you come up with some random
> > argument, you say stuff about "actual records and
> > papers" and then are hard pressed to come up
> > with references.
>
> Well you'll either have to just get used to that or find your own
> references. I'm simply not going to provide them for you to simply poo-poo
> without any basis as you did CO2Science. In short - you don't like it? Don't
> read it.
Is that the "500 scientists" one, where names and professional
reputations were stolen from their rightful owners in service of phony
endorsement?
Damn, how many on the list don't even know their names are being
misused (to put it nicely)?
That had to break some short list of laws somehow. Besides being
grounds for a (stupid, profitable only for the lawyers) hefty lawsuit.
This looks like another neocon con job. That's not "pooh-poohing".
That's calling a crook a crook. --D-y
Ted van de Weteringe
> "reality-based community"---I love it! When do we move?
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
Thanks--I'm clearly not watching enough cable news.
Ted van de Weteringe
> Thanks--I'm clearly not watching enough cable news.
Chung used it in his sig here in rbr from Oct 18, 2004 (1 day after the
NYTM article, according to its pubdate; however, there were several
usenet posts about the article on Oct 16.)
Mike Jacoubowsky
It's an amazing movie on multiple levels. I think one of the things that
keeps your interest up is that you keep looking for some indication of
whether he feels badly for what he did, some feeling of remorse, or whether
his entire life is an intellectual exercise in which remorse isn't relevant,
just good & bad decisions and the ability to learn from them.
Beyond a doubt, a brilliant man. To anyone who doesn't quite get the concept
of "The best & the brightest", you'll have a better idea after watching this
movie.
Bret
wrote:
# foreach bot (`ps agx | grep kunich | awk '{print $1}'`)
# foreach? kill -9 $bot
# foreach? end
The musical version is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fow7iUaKrq4
SLAVE of THE STATE
wrote:
> So I don't feel comfortable
> washing my hands of the argument just because I'm
> not a climate scientist.
Well I wouldn't either. One might wonder why so many are so deaf.
This is a parable about the reality based community:
http://www.primaryresources.co.uk/english/docs/boy_who_cried_wolf.doc
The only problem with them is they don't know when their joking, or
when they are the joke.
SLAVE of THE STATE
<bornfeldm...@dentaltwins.com> wrote:
> "reality-based community"---I love it! When do we move?
It certainly rings the bell on the irony meter so hard that I am now
deaf to what the "realists" have to say.
SLAVE of THE STATE
wrote:
> It's hard work even for trained
> professionals.
If you and Asher reduce my standard of living so much that I have to
live in a cave with you, I am going to have to break your legs with a
stick instead of a bike.
SLAVE of THE STATE
> In article <I7ednbWaQIq6YrzVnZ2dnUVZ_vyin...@earthlink.com>,
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> > Let's not forget that those here who think of themselves as "Liberals" are
> > more than willing to support absolutely fascist techniques to get their way.
>
> "Fascist" - I don't think that word means what you think it does.
It might as well be true, though.
Paul G.
>http://www.local6.com/news/16169506/detail.html
>
> Fla. Teacher Accused Of Wizardry
> Man Made Toothpick Vanish In Class
>
> POSTED: 10:15 pm EDT May 5, 2008
> UPDATED: 12:39 pm EDT May 7, 2008
>
> LAND 'O LAKES, Fla. -- A substitute teacher in Pasco County has lost
> his job after being accused of wizardry.
>
> Bill C
Thanks for the laugh. That's priceless. Also:
Ted van de Weteringe
> "reality-based community"---I love it! When do we move?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
The power of propaganda is amazing, but in the end reality always
wins. That interim period can be pretty rough though.
-Paul
Paul G.
That's an understatement. I think you should call it "Turbo Hysteria".
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
I'm down wit dat. Like, if you lose your job it's a recession, when I
lose my job it's a depression.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
But that will decrease THEIR standards of living. And with all you guys
pinching pennies, what will become of the GDP?
William Asher
>
> If you and Asher reduce my standard of living so much that I have to
> live in a cave with you, I am going to have to break your legs with a
> stick instead of a bike.
>
I don't think you have to worry about that. You'll be in the concentration
camp pedaling a stationary bicycle to generate the electricity required to
run the supercomputers modeling climate.
Leave the keys to your beamer where they can find them.
--
Bill Asher
Donald Munro
>> If you and Asher reduce my standard of living so much that I have to
>> live in a cave with you, I am going to have to break your legs with a
>> stick instead of a bike.
> I don't think you have to worry about that. You'll be in the
> concentration camp pedaling a stationary bicycle to generate the
> electricity required to run the supercomputers modeling climate.
Oy, whats going to happen to the rest of our afternoon training rides.
Donald Munro
>> It certainly rings the bell on the irony meter so hard that I am now
>> deaf to what the "realists" have to say.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_framing
>
>
> lose my job it's a depression.
If he loses his job we all lose our afternoon training ride.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
>>
> Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>> I'm down wit dat. Like, if you lose your job it's a recession, when I
>> lose my job it's a depression.
>
> If he loses his job we all lose our afternoon training ride.
>
I don't even want to know how that works.
Michael Press
Individuals or groups calling themselves `reality based'
commit hubris. The laws of irony are against them.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
>
> >
> > If you and Asher reduce my standard of living so much that I have to
> > live in a cave with you, I am going to have to break your legs with a
> > stick instead of a bike.
> >
>
> I don't think you have to worry about that. You'll be in the concentration
> camp pedaling a stationary bicycle to generate the electricity required to
> run the supercomputers modeling climate.
Hunh! What? Did somebody mention supermodels climbing computers?
--
Michael Press
Robert Chung
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
>
> Individuals or groups calling themselves `reality based'
> commit hubris. The laws of irony are against them.
Read the link.
Paul G.
Ah, but reading the link would be `reality based'.
Jack Hollis
>The social and economic science of climate change is really very simple, to
>avoid making any sacrifices during our lifetimes, most of us are betting
>that the really bad effects will occur after we are dead.
Why think of them as bad. When my son asked me what would happen if
the sea level rises 100 feet, I tell him that we wont have to drive as
far to go to the beach.
dusto...@mac.com
> <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ad8ee411-fe7b-47aa...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > The list is phony. Maybe not Rovian, but a good smear (lie)
> > nonetheless.
>
> > Hint: you can tell that some of those on the list don't agree with the
> > standpoint of the list-makers because they ask (some in no uncertain
> > terms) that their names be removed from said list.
>
> I've got news for you - MANY scientists asked for their names to be removed
> from the UN document because not only did they NOT agree with the findings
> but the committee management even stated that they changed the papers to
> suit their opinions.
>
> Funny you didn't make anything out of that.
Which changes the "500" bullshit exactly how?
I'm not talking about global warming (hint hint).
"Lying" is the problem. Let's stay there and get that straightened
out first, OK? --D-y
Paul G.
That sounds good... except you'll be starving because of decades of
drought in crop producing areas and you won't be driving because all
the ports and many of the oil fields world-wide will be underwater.
But what the hell, go ahead and pick out a nice bathing suit.
-Paul
Jack Hollis
wrote:
>> Why think of them as bad. When my son asked me what would happen if
>> the sea level rises 100 feet, I tell him that we wont have to drive as
>> far to go to the beach.
>
>That sounds good... except you'll be starving because of decades of
>drought in crop producing areas
Nonsense, my fridge will be stocked full of Alaska oranges and
grapefruits.
>and you won't be driving because all
>the ports and many of the oil fields world-wide will be underwater.
I'll be driving my electric car to the beach that will be charged at
home from electricity produced by nuclear energy.
>But what the hell, go ahead and pick out a nice bathing suit.
>-Paul
I prefer natural fibers so it will be made from Canadian cotton.
Fred Fredburger
> In another thread Tom Kunich wrote:
>> Psst - MOST "climate scientists" deny "global warming".
>
> Robert Chung wrote:
>> Hmmm. Well, in matters like these I try to start with little steps.
>> Pointing out how foolish you are is almost always a reasonable beginning.
>
> I think you may have bitten off more than you can chew. Although the
> voyeur in Schwartz might enjoy your attempts.
>
>
Bob has weird ideas about voyeurism.
Jack Hollis
wrote:
>Global warming MAY be occurring - if so it is a natural process that man has
>essentially no connection to. More than likely it is nothing more than
>another warming phase caused by the sun. The fact is that historically we're
>on the edge of another ice age.
The earth's temperature has always changed, it is currently changing
and it will continue to change.
Very few scientists would question that the earth has gotten warmer
over the last century. Determining the average temperature of the
earth is not an exact science, but very few serious scientists would
disagree that the earth is in a warming cycle.
There is also scientific evidence that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. This
has been proven by empirical experiments which have been replicated
numerous times. You can take that as a fact.
Human activity has been increasing the amount of CO2 in the
atmosphere.
Therefore it is reasonable to assume that human activity is having an
effect on global temperature.
Going beyond that is where the trouble lies.
The temperature of the earth is effected by numerous factors, of which
the greenhouse effect is only one. It is impossible to determine
accurately what percent of the earth's temperature is the result of
the greenhouse effect. The overall climate system is not understood
well enough to do that.
To add to the problem, the greenhouse effect itself is a very complex
process. It is impossible to accurately measure exactly how much CO2
contributes to the overall greenhouse effect.
Thus it is impossible for there to be any scientific proof of exactly
how much humans are contributing to global warming.
In reality, there aren't two camps to this issue. The reality is that
there is a continuum, of opinions. The top end of the spectrum is
seen in the UN ICCP report which states that it is "highly likely"
that a "significant" amount of the warming seen in the past 100 years
is of human origin. Obviously even this statement is not very
precise. On the other end are scientists that say that CO2
contribution to the greenhouse effect is small and that human activity
is only a small percent of that amount.
The bottom line is that no one really knows for sure. I'm rooting for
the scientists that minimize the human impact because I have very
little hope that there will be any reduction in CO2 emission. In
fact, I'm sure that the opposite is true. CO2 emissions will continue
to increase.
Of course, there are some people who think that global warming isn't
that bad and that humans will adjust just fine. Or perhaps humans may
come up with a technical solution that will allow them to control the
CO2 levels in the atmosphere, or at least stop the human contribution
to CO2.