Bring back global warming!
Andre Jute
1992. Today is 22 March and all the cycling I've managed to do since
the beginning of the year is 312Km, and every inch of that a misery of
cold and wet.
Today's recce also showed that floods and frosts have destroyed the
tarmac surface of several lesser-trafficked -- and therefore favourite
cycling -- farm lanes and roads. These surfaces, all last remade
between ten and fifteen years ago showed minimal deterioration for all
the intervening years, then just one really tough winter and bam! Some
of them are impassible by the road bikes some of my pedalpals ride,
and not much fun either for those of us on big-tyre bikes.
Andre Jute
The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has
now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich
Phil H
<noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
>
> <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >This has been the worst year for cycling since I took up cycling in
> >1992. Today is 22 March and all the cycling I've managed to do since
> >the beginning of the year is 312Km, and every inch of that a misery of
> >cold and wet.
>
> >Today's recce also showed that floods and frosts have destroyed the
> >tarmac surface of several lesser-trafficked -- and therefore favourite
> >cycling -- farm lanes and roads. These surfaces, all last remade
> >between ten and fifteen years ago showed minimal deterioration for all
> >the intervening years, then just one really tough winter and bam! Some
> >of them are impassible by the road bikes some of my pedalpals ride,
> >and not much fun either for those of us on big-tyre bikes.
>
> weather and global warming.
>
> >Andre Jute
> >The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has
> >now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich
>
> abusive regimes in the history of the planet for cheap political ploy
> and troll. (Pssst - that makes you a major asshole like the fuckwit
> Snorti and his know false claims of anti-Semitism as political
> fodder.)
What a fine thing it would be if the rhetoric was coming from one side
only! As far as the science of GW goes, it's the most messed up
situation possible.
Phil H
Tim McNamara
* Still Just Me * <noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >This has been the worst year for cycling since I took up cycling in
> >1992. Today is 22 March and all the cycling I've managed to do since
> >the beginning of the year is 312Km, and every inch of that a misery
> >of cold and wet.
> >
> >Today's recce also showed that floods and frosts have destroyed the
> >tarmac surface of several lesser-trafficked -- and therefore
> >favourite cycling -- farm lanes and roads. These surfaces, all last
> >remade between ten and fifteen years ago showed minimal
> >deterioration for all the intervening years, then just one really
> >tough winter and bam! Some of them are impassible by the road bikes
> >some of my pedalpals ride, and not much fun either for those of us
> >on big-tyre bikes.
>
> Another dolt
You could have stopped there and saved yourself some typing.
--
Faith is believing what you know ain't so.
-Mark Twain
andre...@aol.com
The content of your message has nothing to do with your PS, nor it
validates is. Regardless of your stance about global warming, weather
and climate are unrelated things and you probably know this very well.
So, save the trolling.
Tim McNamara
<c587863d-b195-42cf...@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
"andre...@aol.com" <andre...@aol.com> wrote:
So stop feeding the troll! The only way he will go away is if he is
ignored and not reinforced for his jackassery. Put him in your kill
file; if he creates a new sock puppet, put that in your kill file.
Andre Jute
a few, it turns out; slow learners by definition don't learn from
their mistakes; perhaps slow learners *are* their error, perhaps slow
learners *become* their errors. We can discuss that next winter when
we have time for metaphysics, or sooner if this miserable winter drags
on.
* Clueless wrote cluelessly:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >This has been the worst year for cycling since I took up cycling in
> >1992. Today is 22 March and all the cycling I've managed to do since
> >the beginning of the year is 312Km, and every inch of that a misery of
> >cold and wet.
> >
> >Today's recce also showed that floods and frosts have destroyed the
> >tarmac surface of several lesser-trafficked -- and therefore favourite
> >cycling -- farm lanes and roads. These surfaces, all last remade
> >between ten and fifteen years ago showed minimal deterioration for all
> >the intervening years, then just one really tough winter and bam! Some
> >of them are impassible by the road bikes some of my pedalpals ride,
> >and not much fun either for those of us on big-tyre bikes.
>
> Another dolt who doesn't understand the difference between local
> weather and global warming.
Why, clueless, it is easy once you put your mind in gear, if you have
one of course:
a) Local weather is what one may observe locally.
b) Global weather is the aggregate of many local observations.
c) Global climate is the tend of global weather over some arbitrarily
chosen term. Currently there are no reliable estimates of either
weather or climate beyond about five *days*.
d) Global warming is the aggregate temperature of maliciously selected
heat islands whose data is manipulated for a pre-determined result, as
we leaned in the Climategate revelations, in short a massive
scientific hoax and political fraud.
I imagine (because I don't know any such people except in newsgroups)
that anyone, like you clearly, who doesn't understand these four
relationships, must be particularly brainless and easily manipulated.
I > >Andre Jute
> >The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has
> >now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich
>
> Nice to see you trivialize the horrid excesses of one of the most
> abusive regimes one of the most
> abusive regimes
You're a bit slow, dear Clueless, in catching on that the IPCC is "
one of the most abusive regimes in the history of the planet". They've
wrecked the respect in which we once held the scientific community,
beyond wrecking the careers of the many scientists who dared stand up
to their irrational religion of global warming.
>for cheap political ploy
I don't have politics; in fact, you yourself pointed out offensively
that I'm not entitled to any. All I have is reason, rationality,
facts, to set off against your irrational and destructive belief in
global warming.
> and troll.
I take this dumb remark up in my reply to one of your fellow global
warmie clowns, who of course all make the same mistake as you do, to
believe that anyone who laughs at your faith in global warming is
trying to provoke you personally. Besides the entertaining navel-
complex your attitude reveals, why should anyone care to hit as huge a
target as you, dear Clueless? (A hit on any wall of the barn rings the
bell!)
>(Pssst - that makes you a major asshole like the fuckwit
> Snorti and his know false claims of anti-Semitism as political
> fodder.)
Sure, if you don't have rational answers, revert to type: call anyone
bringing reason to bear on your irrational beliefs filthy names.
Unsigned out of contempt
Andre Jute
If you look at it positively, Phil, certain facts emerge:
1. Global warming is dead. The obsequies are merely slightly
protracted because the current crop of pols don't want to admit they
were duped, and a large bureaucracy like the UN moves at glacial
pace.
2. Science in general has been damaged by letting the global warming
fraudsters get away with fraud and open intimidation of dissenters.
(Crap like the National Academy of Science setting up the North Panel
to "protect" Mann against the justified investigation of the US
Senate, though North partially redeemed the NAS by agreeing with
Wegman that Mann is an incompetent and a crook.) But this episode of
scientific madness resembles Lysenkoism quite closely, and science,
and the world, survived Lysenko. Perhaps lessons will be learned,
perhaps not, but there is no reason to believe the damage is permanent
or even long-lasting.
3. Climate science is probably fucked for a generation. So what? Even
if global warming was real -- a hypothetical case, as it clearly never
was and couldn't be in the presence of the historical data from the
Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age -- there is no urgency to do
anything at all, nor anything useful that we could do even if there
was urgency.
4. However, Climate Science is a useful multifaceted science on which
the disgraceful episode of Global Warming is merely a pimple that is
in the process of being squeezed. Within Climate Science, the
historical heat record is a useful input. Of course, that historical
heat record is totally fucked, because screwing around with it is the
mechanism by which the Global Warmers perpetrated their scientific
fraud. But somewhere raw data still exists, and there is a generation
of work for a new generation of honest paleoclimatologists in
reconstituting that data, or working with such of the satellite data
that Christie & Co have managed to protect from corruption by the
global warming fraudsters. In short, if you have college-age children,
now is the time to consider that there may be lots of work available
in that field.
All is never lost to those with their brains in gear. It's just a
matter of viewpoint, what Edward de Bono calls lateral thinking.
Andre Jute
Global Warming is like Scientology, only with less science -- and I
said it long before the Climategate exposed those clowns as crooks
Andre Jute
> In article <a84iq5tpeijr4repose6rhioltht4v2...@4ax.com>,
Little Timmie surely has the Global Warming Faith. But he has no
answers to those who can prove so easily that Global Warming is a
scientific hoax and political fraud. Global Warming is his religion.
He doesn't even want Clueless to argue the case -- after all, "Faith
is believing what you know ain't so," of which genus Global Warming is
a prime example.
Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- John Maynard Keynes
Andre Jute
> On Mar 22, 5:21 pm, Andre Jute <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > This has been the worst year for cycling since I took up cycling in
> > 1992. Today is 22 March and all the cycling I've managed to do since
> > the beginning of the year is 312Km, and every inch of that a misery of
> > cold and wet.
>
> > Today's recce also showed that floods and frosts have destroyed the
> > tarmac surface of several lesser-trafficked -- and therefore favourite
> > cycling -- farm lanes and roads. These surfaces, all last remade
> > between ten and fifteen years ago showed minimal deterioration for all
> > the intervening years, then just one really tough winter and bam! Some
> > of them are impassible by the road bikes some of my pedalpals ride,
> > and not much fun either for those of us on big-tyre bikes.
>
> > Andre Jute
> > The IPCC -- longest hand job in the history of mass hysteria -- has
> > now lasted almost twice as long as the Third Reich
>
> The content of your message has nothing to do with your PS, nor it
> validates is.
Eh, where did I say that my message has anything to do with my sig
file, or validates it? My sig file needs no validation, sonny:
history, belching deja vu, has already validated the great hysteria:
Hitler and Nazi Germany, Joe Stalin and Lysenko with their manmade
famines, Rachel Carson and the Banning of DDT, Mao Tse Tung and his
destructive belief in central planning, James Hansen and Global
Warming, all genocides of ever larger proportions. Carson killed more
people, most of them poor and hungry, than all the political genocides
together, and the bee in Hansen's bonnet about global warming will
soon have killed more by misdirecting trillions of dollars that should
have been spent on basics (clean water, reducing infant mortality,
basic health and education, shooting warlords who interfere with
peasant agriculture) than Carson did.
>Regardless of your stance about global warming, weather
> and climate are unrelated things
Really? Climate is merely the term aggregate of weather, unless, iike
the Climategate Scum (Jones, Mann, Briffa, that lot), you thing global
warming is some magical property that doesn't need to conform to the
rules of science. Of course, with you lot Global Warming is a
religion, as demonstrated by Little Timmie's admonition to you not to
argue my points.
>and you probably know this very well.
Apparently better than you do.
> So, save the trolling.
Gee, you mean I shouldn't disturb the thoughtless equilibrium of you
clowns? Actually, it is a social duty to put down the global warmies
hard, and to eradicate them wherever possible, so that they cannot
arise in another form. They're far more dangerous than militant
Islamism, which at best will kill a few tens of millions of people
before Western technology stops it dead in its tracks, as it has
before. See above for a comparison.
Andre Jute
Charisma is the art of infuriating inadequates by merely doing one's
homework
Andre Jute
Poor Timmie has now progressed from begging people not to give me an
opportunity to demonstrate that his religion of Global Warming is a
scientific hoax and a political fraud. And where has he arrived: he
now begs them not to talk to me at all, as if ignoring me will
undermine rational arguments!
Poor Timmie. And some State Board licensed this poor specimen of a
fool to work with defenseless handicapped people...Jesus Christ! I
cringe every time I see this Tim McNamara's name and remember that he
calls himself a psychologist: whoever punched his ticket should be
investigated for either incompetence or corruption.
Andre Jute
“We must get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” -- Jonathan Overpeck,
climate "scientist", IPCC writer
Andre Jute
<noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:00:55 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
>
> <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >If you look at it positively, Phil, certain facts emerge:
>
> >1. Global warming is dead. The obsequies are merely slightly
> >protracted because the current crop of pols don't want to admit they
> >were duped, and a large bureaucracy like the UN moves at glacial
> >pace.
>
>
> Phew! I guess we can forget about that problem. That's a relief, I
> thought it was a serious concern.
Nah, it was a fraud a few supercilious "scientists" in the grasp of
unscrupulous bureaucrats perpetrated only impressionable fashion
victims like you. Most of the victims now know they were led around by
the nose; a few made a religion of the fashion for global warming and
are now ridiculous. You're right just to forget about it.
Tim McNamara
* Still Just Me * <noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:25:09 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >And where has he arrived: he now begs them not to talk to me at all,
> >as if ignoring me will undermine rational arguments!
>
> Actually, he just thinks you're a blowhard who is spouting nonsense,
> but feel free to put any interpretation on it you like - it's amusing
> to the rest of us.
I would ask you to stop insulting blowhards. Jute is a poisonous
blithering dickwad, not a blowhard. He is best ignored or perhaps
observed at a discreet distance. He is certainly not worth engaging.
andre...@aol.com
> Really? Climate is merely the term aggregate of weather, unless, iike
> the Climategate Scum (Jones, Mann, Briffa, that lot), you thing global
> warming is some magical property that doesn't need to conform to the
> rules of science. Of course, with you lot Global Warming is a
> religion, as demonstrated by Little Timmie's admonition to you not to
> argue my points.
Well, its a little more complicated than this. You are trying to
insinuate that because its a colder than usual winter season, that
means global warming is nonsense. I am not here to argue w/ you about
global warming. My point is that local and temporal weather patterns
have nothing to do with global warming regardless of it being hotter
or colder. As you probably know, it is colder than usual this winter
because of a particular weather pattern in the arctic is forcing cold
air down which is mixing with warmer in mid latitudes causing
excessive snow. The excessive snow is cooling the surface of the earth
which combined with higher pressure systems is allowing cold air to
travel further down. This of course is a temporal and local phenomenon
that has nothing to do with global warming or cooling.
So, "sonny" I am going to assume that you knew this and you are
trolling and misusing information to push your agenda against global
warming. However, since you also know that people are not going to
change their minds about it, you know that you are trolling just to
irritate.
If you are sincere in your associations, and not just trolling, then
you are an ignoramus who doesn't know what he is talking about.
However, I'll give you credit for not being stupid. You are just a
trolling pain in the ass, "sonny". So, liddle Andy, why not just stick
to talking about little weird, green, overpriced bikes?
Andres
Lack of charisma is the habit of the inadequate to try infuriate
others who do their homework with constant trolling
Andre Jute
> > Really? Climate is merely the term aggregate of weather, unless, iike
> > the Climategate Scum (Jones, Mann, Briffa, that lot), you thing global
> > warming is some magical property that doesn't need to conform to the
> > rules of science. Of course, with you lot Global Warming is a
> > religion, as demonstrated by Little Timmie's admonition to you not to
> > argue my points.
>
> Well, its a little more complicated than this.
Nope. It's really simple. Once, in the Middle Ages, for hundreds of
years it was warmer than it is now, without any manmade CO2, and with
all-round benefit. It is when modern agriculture as established. Then
came the Little Ice Age, and we're still recovering from it, so of
course global temperature rises. It is entirely natural that it should
rise. It is entirely natural that within the rising trend it should
fluctuate. We aren't even on a rising part of the scale, we weren't in
the entire 20C, in 1988 when the IPCC institutionalized James Hansen's
bee-in-the-bonnet we had been on a cooling trend since WWII, the few
good years in the 90s were an entirely natural if too short interlude
of natural variability, and now we're on a downward trend again.
Anyone who ever said different is a liar, and generally speaking a
confessed liar too. See the Climategate letters those guys sent each
other, confessing to their crookery to "hide the decline".
>You are trying to
> insinuate
Sonny, I save insinuation for people who can appreciate my slyest
humour. For global warmies I say the thing bluntly up front and in
plain language because by definition they don't have the brains to
understand even the slightest sophistication.
>that because its a colder than usual winter season, that
> means global warming is nonsense.
Just that part of the sentence contains several errors. It wasn't
colder than usual. It was merely a return to the usual weather we've
had throughout our lifetime, with a brief interregnum during the 90s
when we had several nicer years. Get it through your thick head: we're
in an interglacial period, in which the temperature should generally
rise but with shorter-term variations, and right now we're in a
downward variation. (The next bunch of trendies who'll abuse us for
stupidity for not agreeing with their new religion will be the Global
Ice Agers, complete with their own UN bureau and "consensus".)
>I am not here to argue w/ you about
> global warming.
Eh?
>My point is that local and temporal weather patterns
Heaven has different weather patterns? This freudian slip of yours is
all the proof required of my point that with you clowns global warming
is a religion, not a matter of science.
> have nothing to do with global warming regardless of it being hotter
> or colder.
More proof of the religious mania. What has socalled "global warming"
to do with then if not the trend discernable (or claimed to be
discernable) from the aggregate of many local weather conditions?
Riddle me that, Batboy.
And here comes the marxist turn, everything that doesn't fit is an
anomaly, and anyway too complicated for dissenters to understand:
>As you probably know, it is colder than usual this winter
> because of a particular weather pattern in the arctic is forcing cold
> air down which is mixing with warmer in mid latitudes causing
> excessive snow. The excessive snow is cooling the surface of the earth
> which combined with higher pressure systems is allowing cold air to
> travel further down.
Let's see: "...particular weather pattern... mid latitudes...
excessive snow..." and so on, wholelotta buzzwords from which we are
to conclude that there is something unnatural about cold weather in
winter, or that someone shoulda done something about "excessive snow"
upsetting the Global New World Order. It's like a railroad complaining
about leaves on the rails in autumn!
But the conclusion Muro comes to takes the breath away in its tunnel-
vision stupidity:
>This of course is a temporal and local phenomenon
> that has nothing to do with global warming or cooling.
Temporal as opposed to spiritual, of course! Muro is telling us that
we shall return to the full spirituality of Global Warming once the
temperature starts rising again.
You, Moron Muro, if Global Warming isn't about the climate, which is a
reduct of all the weather, what is it about? Go on, I've exposed the
hidden agenda often enough on this newsgroup for even you to catch on.
> So, "sonny" I am going to assume that you knew this
I know exactly the opposite, as I've been explaining for over two
years. You're just a slow learner. You *presume* global warming caused
by manmade CO2 because it is trendy and you're a hanger-on of all the
white boys' fashions. I don't; I used to await proof but now I know it
was a fraud because the fraudsters confessed in the Climategate
papers.
>and you are trolling
"Trolling", eh? By which I take it you mean saying things which are
true but against your religion of global warming.
> and misusing information to push your agenda against global
> warming.
That's one of the things that undermines climate science, in the case
of global warming fatally, that it has become an "agenda". Rational
people don't have "agendas" about scientific questions. I'm rational:
I've remained resolutely rational about science since the hole in the
ozone layer scare of the 1950s when, as a teenage Sunday paper
columnist, I would ask once a month to be shown the hole in the ozone
layer. I'm still waiting. My skepticism has survived all the
successive scaremongers -- and given me the experience to see
instantly that the global warmies are just more doomsayers without any
science -- while whole generations of little fashion victims like you
have come and gone, mostly gone.
>However, since you also know that people are not going to
> change their minds about it,
Wanna bet your house on your ignorance of history, sonny?
>you know that you are trolling just to
> irritate.
You and the other global warmies don't need to read me.
> If you are sincere in your associations, and not just trolling, then
> you are an ignoramus who doesn't know what he is talking about.
You're still presuming that global warming is real. Why don't you
enumerate some proof rather than calling me names? You don't have any
proof, do you? All you have is "faith".
> However, I'll give you credit for not being stupid. You are just a
> trolling pain in the ass, "sonny".
Oh, I'm very stupid. I absolutely insist on proof that I can
understand, rather than just believing because a self-appointed high
priest says I must believe. And if he doesn't explain, i'll help to
cut him off at the knees. You clowns should be as stupid as I am and
we wouldn't have wasted trillions of tax payers money on the chimera
of global warming.
>So, liddle Andy, why not just stick
> to talking about little weird, green, overpriced bikes?
Don't forget the gold coachlines, sonny. Anyway, relative to your
disposable income, your bike probably cost many times what mine cost
relative to my disposable income. If you knew any economics, you'd
realize that. But if you clowns had any economics, we wouldn't be
having this conversation because you would long since have costed
global warming and found it will cost the greatest genocide the world
has ever known. In fact, even the aborted 20 year run of global
warming as official scare tactics has probably already created the
greatest genocide ever, intentionally so, because among the hidden
agendas of the proponents of "global warming" is reversing population
growth.
> Andres
>
> Lack of charisma is the habit of the inadequate to try infuriate
> others who do their homework with constant trolling
Imitation is the most sincere expression of admiration. But you could
be a little less embarrassingly clumsy with these dull paraphrases,
Muro.
Hide the decline!
andre...@aol.com
Little boy, you are dumb and obstinate, and in your desire to see your
own writing, you proved my point. Let me go slowly for you, sonny,
because it seems that long posts with too much information confuse
you, even yours since you are proving my point in your effort to
refute it.
You have been arguing that global warming is a myth, so lets take that
as a given for now. You won, there is no global warming, you have
convinced me. You also pointed out that this winter has been a little
colder than previous few winters. Ok, so far so good. So since this
winter has been a little colder than last year, it must be something
other than global warming. What is it then? It must be changes in the
weather from one year to the next. Ok, lets call these changes weather
patterns. We also know that it is not the entire world that is cooler
this year, but it is a phenomenon of the northern hemisphere,
particularly around the tropic of cancer below the arctic region. So,
we have a weather pattern that is happening this year in a region of
the globe that is producing cooler temperatures in certain parts of
the northern hemisphere. And again, since global warming is a myth as
you say, the weather patterns affecting the northern hemisphere cannot
be associated to global warming. Since they are happening in a certain
region at a given time, they are also localized and temporal and due
to weather phenomena or patterns.
This shouldn't be difficult to understand unless you are feeble mined.
An advanced elementary school student should have no problem grasping
this. It has nothing to do with the IPCC or global warming so I fail
to understand your insistence in bringing global warming up unless you
have OCD about global warming, which is very likely. The funniest
thing is your reference to Marxism. What does it have to do with
anything?
Anyways little boy, enjoy writing a lengthy response full of insults
with unrelated references to the IPCC, global warming and any other
groups or individuals who have offended you for whatever reason. It is
always amusing to me to see the level of sophistry that you are
willing to engage in to make a totally incoherent point that you have
decided to embrace. All the spinning combined with the insults provide
much amusement for many of us.
xoxoxo
Your daddy.
Andre Jute
from you except that when it is cold, it is weather, and when it is
warm it global warming, and it is so because you say so. By contrast
we have a whole row of verifiable facts from me, and the Climategate
confessions of the global warming fraudsters, lead writers for the
IPCC, that they faked up your religion of Global Warming to "hide the
decline". It is pathetic to believe in the words of a High Priest who
has already confessed he only conjured up the religion so he could
deflower virgins.
Show me the Global Warming, sonny, and I will fall to my knees and
adore it with you.
Not holding my breath.
***
I really, sincerely hope that they don't let an inferior specimen like
you teach or work with handicapped or underprivileged people.
Children, the poor and the sick already have enough burdens and
confusions in their lives without you adding the inadequacy of your
"faith".
Andre Jute
Global Warming is like Scientology, only with less science -- and I
said it long before the Climategate exposed those clowns as crooks
Andre Jute
worth restating the points I hinted at:
1. Global warming is good for cyclists, forests, farmers, hungry
people, the tourist industry, and many, many others. Even the IPCC
admits as much.
2. If there were global warming, we couldn't stop it.
3. A simple check of the efficacy of remedies is to ask "Will we
return to the prior condition if we stop taking these anti-measures?"
4. Since all the anti-global warming measures have had no effect on a
non-problem, we cannot bring back global warming because it never
existed.
5. The money we pissed up against a wall on non-measures to solve a
non-problem cannot be brought back either.
6. Those trillions of dollars could have ended hunger and infant
mortality in the third world.
7. Those who agitated to spend those trillions instead on non-measures
to combat a non-problem are guilty of a huge genocide by mechanisms I
have already described. Their hubris is staggering.
Andre Jute
Feed a tree today, produce more CO2!
Ben C
[...]
> You have been arguing that global warming is a myth, so lets take that
> as a given for now. You won, there is no global warming, you have
> convinced me. You also pointed out that this winter has been a little
> colder than previous few winters. Ok, so far so good. So since this
> winter has been a little colder than last year, it must be something
> other than global warming. What is it then? It must be changes in the
> weather from one year to the next. Ok, lets call these changes weather
> patterns. We also know that it is not the entire world that is cooler
> this year, but it is a phenomenon of the northern hemisphere,
> particularly around the tropic of cancer below the arctic region. So,
> we have a weather pattern that is happening this year in a region of
> the globe that is producing cooler temperatures in certain parts of
> the northern hemisphere. And again, since global warming is a myth as
> you say, the weather patterns affecting the northern hemisphere cannot
> be associated to global warming. Since they are happening in a certain
> region at a given time, they are also localized and temporal and due
> to weather phenomena or patterns.
>
> This shouldn't be difficult to understand unless you are feeble mined.
Local changes in temperature may not be difficult to understand, but
global ones sure are.
I'm not really arguing with your point, since you sensibly made no
claims about global temperature, but I won't get my cheque from Exxon
Mobil this month if I don't butt in with something.
Temperatures around the globe at any one time range from about -80C to
+40C, and of course also vary in each location throughout the year. Yet
people are discussing attribution of global warming of fractions of a
degree.
The figure they use for "average temperature" is what they call the
"globally averaged anomaly", which I think is the average of the
differences in each location from the historical average temperature for
that location for that day of the year. Then they average _those_ over a
whole year. But I may have the details wrong.
A change of a few degrees in this number is then supposed with a high
degree of certainty to cause plagues, hurricanes, droughts, floods,
chain wear, broken spokes, AIDS and drowned puppies although it won't
necessarily mean it's actually any hotter anywhere on any given day
since local variations everywhere are much larger than these global
variations.
This is an interesting paper on global average temperatures:
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
Andre Jute
Didn't your mother tell you, Ben, that it is wicked to tease the
slower boys?
> This is an interesting paper on global average temperatures:http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
"...the fundamental meaninglessness of so-called
global temperature data..."
Jean-Paul Sartre spins in his grave with envy! In our time there can
be no clearer statement of that fundamental (nauseous?) hopelessness
which only trendies believe in!
Andre Jute
"Loonies like Asher will continue to shout 'Global Warming' until
they suddenly start shouting 'Global Cooling' as if they'd done that
from the beginning." -- Tom Kunich
"Oh, I've seen the loonies do that for half a century. Asher's problem
is that he has such a poor grasp of history, he thinks the New
Apocalypse of Global Warming is brand spanking new and exciting." --
Andre Jute
andre...@aol.com
>
> read more »
I never said anything about global warming nor made the claim that
when it is warm it is global warming. Again, it is you that in your
immense production of meaningless text you get all confused and make
misattributions. All I said is that making broad claims about climate
based on localized weather phenomena is what the ignoramus do.
If you want to know why it is cold, warm, rainy, snowy, windy, humid
or dry in a given region of the world, you need to look at specific
weather patterns affecting the region. You did not do that. In fact,
you did not make references to any verifiable fact regarding why its
been so cold this year and when I did, you made a reference to Marxism
and then you launched into one of your cathartic diatribes about
global warming.
If you are really interested in finding the reason it is pretty cold
this winter, just google it. It is easy. You'll find straight forward
reasons for it. Don't try to associate it with global warming because
you'll start getting confused again. Then in desperation you'll go
into another tirade where you confuse all your facts and start hurling
insults.
You should stick to simpler things like little, green, overpriced
bikes and cooking lasagna.
Andre Jute
it to us to justify your standard global warmie kneejerk accusation
that I confuse local weather with global warming. Where did I say my
cold winter has anything to do with global warming? My point is (and
has always been in the total absence of proof, or even sense, from the
global warmies) that there is no global warming for it to have
anything to do with. -- AJ
> ...
>
> read more »
Ben C
[...]
> 4. Since all the anti-global warming measures have had no effect on a
> non-problem, we cannot bring back global warming because it never
> existed.
Not only have they had no effect on a non-problem, they haven't even had
any effect on a non-cause of a non-problem.
Andre Jute
<noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:09:04 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
>
> <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> My point is (and
>
> >has always been in the total absence of proof, or even sense, from the
> >global warmies) that there is no global warming for it to have
> >anything to do with.
>
> warming? The data seems to contradict you.
>That puts you in a very
> select group:
Can't be many of us who've been so right for so long about these
serial scaremongers.
>even the scientists (tools) that say the warming is not
> man made admit that the planet is getting warmer.
That was when Mann, Jones, Briffa and the rest of the Gang of IPCC
Clowns were still presumed to have got the statistics right, before
Wegman labelled them incompetents before the US Senate and North on
behalf of the NAS was forced to agree with Wegman. That was before the
Climategate Letters revealed the lengths to which that criminal scum
went to "hide the decline", that is while they were still presumed
honest if incompetent. Now that their incompetence and criminal
dishonesty has been revealed, more and more scientists are standing up
to say global warming is a scientific fraud.
But that is merely an interesting fact. I never made any appeal to
authority nor do I need it now. I leave that sort of limp-minded and
limp-wristed foolishness to the global warmies, who thereby once again
prove that they mentally defective, at the very least impressionable
weaklings. I merely say, as I've said all along, that history proves
there is no global warming.
Andre Jute
I'm too sensitive to be that blunt about The Cause of people who have
just Lost Their Religion, if not their misplaced (heh-heh) faith.
Andre Jute
Never more brutal than he has to be -- Nelson Mandela
Global Warming is like Scientology, only with less science -- Andre
Jute, 1988
AMuzi
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
* Still Just Me * wrote:
>> “We must get rid of the Jute” -- Everyone in the r.b.t newsgroup,
Maybe we should build a model, ignore some data sets and
just conclude him nonexistent. Yeah, that should work.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Bill Sornson
{Gee, someone snipped it all; guess they had no rejoinder!}
> * Still Just A Completely Clueless Moron * apparently wrote:
>>> “We must get rid of the Jute” -- Everyone in the r.b.t newsgroup,
> Maybe we should build a model, ignore some data sets and
> just conclude him nonexistent. Yeah, that should work.
And, of course, demonize those who insist he lives.
BS (fits)
Andre Jute
<noEmailto...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:12:51 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
>
>
>
> <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > “We must get rid of the Jute” -- Everyone in the r.b.t newsgroup,
This is what Clueless has no answers to except a fascist attempt to
shut me up:
***
No further comment is necessary. -- AJ
Andre Jute
[GHOSTLY VOICE OFF]
Do I hear someone calling?
Modesty forbids that I should sign this missive from beyond global
warming.
Jeff Liebermann
>This is an interesting paper on global average temperatures:
>http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
Nice, thanks. My problem is that the same people that can't
accurately predict the weather next week, are claiming that they can
predict the weather 100 years from now. Yeah, I know that climate
does not equal weather, but it still seems fishy.
Need a hockey stick? They're easy to make. In 2007, I did my own
number juggling to demonstrate how to create a fake hockey stick,
using the local rainfall statistics. See:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/>
The original graph, using a running 11 year average, doesn't show a
hockey stick. (It does show a rather noticeable drop in rainfall
during the 1930's dust bowl drought):
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/SLV-rainfall.jpg>
However, when I switch from a running average, to a 5th or 6th order
exponential series, the predicted rainfall forms either a dramatic
hockey stick rise or fall:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/SLV-rainfall-06.jpg>
The associated XLS spreadsheet files are in the above directory if you
want to play with the data. For some currently unknown reason, the
trend lines disappear in Open Office, but work in all versions of MS
Excel.
Obligatory bicycle drivel: Someone broke into my office Weds and
stole some laptops and junk. Among the junk was a defective Shimano
MC-FC12 crank which I had removed from my bike to eventually get a
(free) warranty exchange:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/MC-FC12.jpg>
The thieves left the bicycle, but with the crank gone, no free
warranty repair. If someone appears, in the Santa Cruz CA area,
waving this crank with the distinctive stripped pedal threads and
missing teeth, please let me know.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Andre Jute
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:53:11 -0500, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >This is an interesting paper on global average temperatures:
> >http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
>
> Nice, thanks. My problem is that the same people that can't
> accurately predict the weather next week, are claiming that they can
> predict the weather 100 years from now. Yeah, I know that climate
> does not equal weather, but it still seems fishy.
>
> Need a hockey stick? They're easy to make. In 2007, I did my own
> number juggling to demonstrate how to create a fake hockey stick,
> using the local rainfall statistics. See:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/>
>
> The original graph, using a running 11 year average, doesn't show a
> hockey stick. (It does show a rather noticeable drop in rainfall
> during the 1930's dust bowl drought):
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/SLV-rainfall.jpg>
>
> However, when I switch from a running average, to a 5th or 6th order
> exponential series, the predicted rainfall forms either a dramatic
> hockey stick rise or fall:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/slv-wx/SLV-rainfall-06.jpg>
>
> The associated XLS spreadsheet files are in the above directory if you
> want to play with the data. For some currently unknown reason, the
> trend lines disappear in Open Office, but work in all versions of MS
> Excel.
Lies, damned lies, and climate statistics!
> Obligatory bicycle drivel: Someone broke into my office Weds and
> stole some laptops and junk. Among the junk was a defective Shimano
> MC-FC12 crank which I had removed from my bike to eventually get a
> (free) warranty exchange:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/MC-FC12.jpg>
> The thieves left the bicycle, but with the crank gone,
When the thieves steal a broken crank and leave the bike, it's a hint
about smartening up your taste, Jeff. The words on the wall read, "GET
A KONA, MAN. IT IS WORTH STEALING."
>no free
> warranty repair. If someone appears, in the Santa Cruz CA area,
> waving this crank with the distinctive stripped pedal threads and
> missing teeth, please let me know.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Signature separator (or whatever it is called) deliberately
dishonoured to leave Jeff's address in case someone runs across the
thief.
Andre Jute
When we bicyclists take over, bicycle thieves will be hunted down and
hung in the public squares
Michael Press
* Still Just Me * <noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:09:04 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
> <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> My point is (and
> >has always been in the total absence of proof, or even sense, from the
> >global warmies) that there is no global warming for it to have
> >anything to do with.
>
> Your suggestion then, oh ultra one, is that there is no global
> warming? The data seems to contradict you. That puts you in a very
> select group: even the scientists (tools) that say the warming is not
> man made admit that the planet is getting warmer.
Global temperature has been dropping steadily for the
last 6000 years. There is little reason to expect
global temperature to rise again to temperatures
greater than during the medieval warm period except for
fluctuations that we cannot explain. Much more likely
is that temperatures plummet and remain low for another
50000+ years
--
Michael Press
Jobst Brandt
>>> My point is (and has always been in the total absence of proof, or
>>> even sense, from the global warmies) that there is no global
>>> warming for it to have anything to do with.
>> Your suggestion then, oh ultra one, is that there is no global
>> warming? The data seems to contradict you. That puts you in a
>> very select group: even the scientists (tools) that say the warming
>> is not man made admit that the planet is getting warmer.
> Global temperature has been dropping steadily for the last 6000
> years. There is little reason to expect global temperature to rise
> again to temperatures greater than during the medieval warm period
> except for fluctuations that we cannot explain. Much more likely is
> that temperatures plummet and remain low for another 50000+ years
How do you explain the melting of polar ice caps and the vanishing of
glaciers that once covered the Alps and other mountainous regions? I
have pictures in my "Gallery of the Alps" where the Rhone Glacier once
had large areas of ice near the road and now has no visible ice.
The glaciers of Mt. Blanc have similarly shrunk at the Mer du Glace.
Jobst Brandt
Jeff Liebermann
<fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Obligatory bicycle drivel: Someone broke into my office Weds and
>> stole some laptops and junk. Among the junk was a defective Shimano
>> MC-FC12 crank which I had removed from my bike to eventually get a
>> (free) warranty exchange:
>> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/MC-FC12.jpg>
>> The thieves left the bicycle, but with the crank gone,
>When the thieves steal a broken crank and leave the bike, it's a hint
>about smartening up your taste, Jeff. The words on the wall read, "GET
>A KONA, MAN. IT IS WORTH STEALING."
Well, bike is actually a fairly nice looking Specialized Rockhopper
FS. With the crank gone, and no exact replacement available, I'll
probably replace the bottom bracket and crank, which means I might
also need a new chain and front derailleur. I've already replaced the
handlebar and levers, brakes, pads, seat post, seat, and pedals. The
rear derailleur works, but has seen better times. The wheels are
fine, but the tread is for dirt and I'll be riding mostly on pavement.
When I replaced the handlebar, I discovered that the 120mm stem is too
long for me and will need to be replaced with a shorter 90 or 100mm
stem. When finished, all that will be left of the original bicycle
will probably be the frame, forks, and water bottle. This leads me to
suspect that the thief was well versed in bicycle mechanics and
practiced in the art of instant appraisal. He probably determined
that the bicycle will cost more in components to fix than it was
worth, and decided to leave it behind.
>Signature separator (or whatever it is called) deliberately
>dishonoured to leave Jeff's address in case someone runs across the
>thief.
Running across is usually not sufficient. Running over several times,
both lengthwise and across, might be a good start.
>Andre Jute
>When we bicyclists take over, bicycle thieves will be hunted down and
>hung in the public squares
What about bicycle crank thieves?
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
Michael Press
Jobst Brandt <jbr...@sonic.net> wrote:
We are in an interglacial period, and have been for 20
Kyear. Continental glaciers started melting rapidly 20
Kyear ago, and the temperature now is much warmer than
when the continental glaciers started melting; hence
glaciers continue to melt.
--
Michael Press
Bill Sornson
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/03/30/change_is_not_new_104971.html