Al Bore cancels Nopenhagen lovefest for his global warmies
Andre Jute
Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the Climategate
revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort to understand the
science before he let them use him as a front man -- not that he
wasn't a tremendously *big* front man.
Andre Jute
I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging chad time all over
again.
Bill Sornson
Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question was on
Climategate.
Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon footprint' of this little get-together?"
S.
Bill Sornson
Qui si parla Campagnolo
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > Andre Jute wrote:
>
> >> Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the Climategate
> >> revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort to understand the
> >> science before he let them use him as a front man -- not that he
> >> wasn't a tremendously *big* front man.
>
> >> Andre Jute
> >> I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging chad time all over
> >> again.
>
> > Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question was on
> > Climategate.
>
> > Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon footprint' of this little
> > get-together?" S.
>
> Ask and ye shall be galled:
>
These people are being idiots and the message is going to be lost.
Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp their little feet
at the outrageous, but secondary, items like how many limos and jets
going there. They need a new image to promote the message. The earth
IS getting warmer, nobody really knows why tho. Could be man, could be
a natural swing BUT if it IS man, and the repub boobs yell, get
peoples attention over nonsense, then our kids and our kids kids are
screwed. But we are screwed by the likes of the palins, rush's, becks,
hannitys of the world anyway. GOD GUNS GAYS...what else is there?
Ben C
We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time pointlessly
cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit higher.
The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was their
fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more humans. It's
possible their energies might have been better directed elsewhere.
Tim McNamara
<a7c56b9c-3123-4e0e...@z35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
Back in 1980 the necons discovered that the key to controlling the
public discourse is to be loud and persistent. Being right has nothing
to do with it. The neocon commitment is to self-serving agenda, not to
truth. God, guns and gays are just the wedge issues to keep the sheeple
in line supporting an agenda that slowly destroys their lives.
In Andre and Bill we have great examples of this stupidity in action;
and, like their counterparts everywhere, they get enough attention from
it to keep doing it over and over, every day. They're trolls and they
get well-fed.
Tim McNamara
Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
Andre Jute
> On Dec 7, 10:25 am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> > > Andre Jute wrote:
> > >>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-personal...
>
> > >> Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the Climategate
> > >> revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort to understand the
> > >> science before he let them use him as a front man -- not that he
> > >> wasn't a tremendously *big* front man.
>
> > >> Andre Jute
> > >> I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging chad time all over
> > >> again.
>
> > > Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question was on
> > > Climategate.
>
> > > Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon footprint' of this little
> > > get-together?" S.
>
> > Ask and ye shall be galled:
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6736...
>
> These people are being idiots and the message is going to be lost.
> Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp their little feet
> at the outrageous, but secondary, items like how many limos and jets
> going there. They need a new image to promote the message.
They lied about the science, they invented data and contorted data for
political purposes, they ruined the careers of honest scientists who
dared dissent from their lies, above all they lied and lied and lied
about global warming. But you say all that is required is a new
presentation!
Actually, Peter, without the hockey stick (what is what these
Climategate people lied into existence) there is no global warming and
thus no need to search for a cause nor a remedy. The world's leaders
are poncing about in Nopenhagen for no good reason whatsoever.
>The earth
> IS getting warmer, nobody really knows why tho.
Of course the world is getting warmer. And of course everyone with
brains knows why. We're coming out of an ice age, In a few hundred
years we might again reach the temperatures a 1000 years ago, when the
earth was warmer than it is now for several centuries on end. We're
just in the middle of a natural uptrend, with variations around the
mean. The Climategate liars (who I remind you are absolutely central
to the global warming scam) merely with statistical tricks made one
natural variation in the 1990s seem extraordinary. It wasn't, it was
just a lie.
>Could be man,
No, it can't be, at least not by the mechanism of CO2. Regardless of
the shouting and the intimidation from the global warming lobby, CO2
increases *follow* temperature increase, and can therefore not be the
cause of temperature increase.
>could be
> a natural swing BUT if it IS man,
It isn't. The only manmade global warming is an artifact of statiscal
crookery by Jones, Mann, Briffa and others, named in the Wegman Report
to the Senate years ago already. You may remember I've been saying so
all along. Now that lying scum have confessed to their crimes in the
Climategate Papers.
>and the repub boobs yell,
But they turned out to be right all along, and you've been a fool for
two decades, hanging entranced on the lips of gross liars, bowing low
before their "science". But still you call the guys who visibly have
more brains and understanding of science than you "boobs"? God love
Peter, because no one else can love such an obstinate fool.
>get
> peoples attention over nonsense, then our kids and our kids kids are
> screwed.
Yawn. I'm so bored with bikies who fancy themselves Old Testament
prophets. There is no proof of any of that gloomy crap. It has been up
to 6 degrees Celsius warmer for centuries and millennia during the
last 15,000 years, without any evidence of either man's influence or
CO2 influence. That should be enough evidence even for the
impresionable conformists one finds in cycling.
>But we are screwed by the likes of the palins, rush's, becks,
> hannitys of the world anyway. GOD GUNS GAYS...what else is there?
You mean God shoots gays? I wonder if the NRA recruiters know this
yet. Holy shit! What a coup. "I signed up God the Father for a
lifetime membership. You can go now, Charlton, thanks for your help
but we got Da Boss to do your bit now."
Andre Jute
Don't use electricity to cook. Start a bushfire, eat crispy creatures
cooked the natural way.
Ben C
Not the intended moral of the story. It _is_ sensible to keep an eye on
sea-levels and make sure you're prepared for them going up.
But it's foolish to think you can prevent them going up, and extremely
foolish to think you can prevent them going up by cutting CO2.
Bill Sornson
Nice rant. Now try actually /saying something/.
>>> We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time pointlessly
>>> cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit higher.
>>>
>>> The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was their
>>> fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more humans. It's
>>> possible their energies might have been better directed elsewhere.
>>
>> Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
>
> Ah, the siren call of despots: "be scared of the straw man and give me
> the power to rule your lives."
Bingo.
Ben C
[...]
> It isn't. The only manmade global warming is an artifact of statiscal
> crookery by Jones, Mann, Briffa and others, named in the Wegman Report
> to the Senate years ago already.
That isn't strictly speaking the only manmade warming, or even the only
Mann-made warming.
There are also the various ways the hockey stick was subsequently
reinstated: cherry-picking trees in Sibera and grafting the temperature
record onto the reconstruction before smoothing to make the
reconstruction point up at the end ("hide the decline") are two that
have been analyzed recently.
Then there's the less subtle approach we see in their recently released
code of just adding an arbitrary fudge factor:
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
Now we don't know for sure what this means yet, but it is interpolated
over a time series from 1400 to the present and looks suspiciously like
it's meant to squash the MWP and make the 20th C temps kick upwards
alarmingly.
I guess they thought why are we bothering with all this clever
statistical crookery when it's so much easier to just make up some
numbers, add them on, delete the raw data and not release the code.
Andre Jute
> On 2009-12-08, Andre Jute <fiult...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > It isn't. The only manmade global warming is an artifact of statiscal
> > crookery by Jones, Mann, Briffa and others, named in the Wegman Report
> > to the Senate years ago already.
>
> That isn't strictly speaking the only manmade warming, or even the only
> Mann-made warming.
>
> There are also the various ways the hockey stick was subsequently
> reinstated: cherry-picking trees in Sibera and grafting the temperature
> record onto the reconstruction before smoothing to make the
> reconstruction point up at the end ("hide the decline") are two that
> have been analyzed recently.
>
> Then there's the less subtle approach we see in their recently released
> code of just adding an arbitrary fudge factor:
>
> valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,
> 2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
>
> Now we don't know for sure what this means yet, but it is interpolated
> over a time series from 1400 to the present and looks suspiciously like
> it's meant to squash the MWP and make the 20th C temps kick upwards
> alarmingly.
It looks like selected, named data points were flattened by one
quarter their height.
> I guess they thought why are we bothering with all this clever
> statistical crookery when it's so much easier to just make up some
> numbers, add them on, delete the raw data and not release the code.
There's a lesson in arrogance here. These people must once have been
scientists with stars in their eyes and truth in their hearts. Twenty
years of arrogance have done them in by making crookery the norm to
such an extent that they forgot to hide it.
It is amazing that so large a conspiracy took so long to expose...
Andre Jute
A little inaccuracy sometimes saves tons of explanation. --H.H.Munro
("Saki")(1870-1916)
This much? No, more, more. We work in paleoclimatology, man. More,
more, much more!
D'ohBoy
D'ohBoy
Tim McNamara
Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> On 2009-12-08, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnhhsoq7....@bowser.marioworld>,
> > Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2009-12-08, Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> >> > On Dec 7, 10:25�am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
> >> >> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> >> > Andre Jute wrote:
> >> >> >>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-p
> >> >> >>ers onal...
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the
> >> >> >> Climategate revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort
> >> >> >> to understand the science before he let them use him as a
> >> >> >> front man -- not that he wasn't a tremendously *big* front
> >> >> >> man.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Andre Jute I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging
> >> >> >> chad time all over again.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question
> >> >> > was on Climategate.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon footprint' of this little
> >> >> > get-together?" S.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ask and ye shall be galled:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe
> >> >> /67 36...
> >> >
> >> > These people are being idiots and the message is going to be
> >> > lost. Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp their
> >> > little feet at the outrageous, but secondary, items like how
> >> > many limos and jets going there. They need a new image to
> >> > promote the message. The earth IS getting warmer, nobody really
> >> > knows why tho. Could be man, could be a natural swing BUT if it
> >> > IS man, and the repub boobs yell, get peoples attention over
> >> > nonsense, then our kids and our kids kids are screwed.
> >>
> >> We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time
> >> pointlessly cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit
> >> higher.
> >>
> >> The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was
> >> their fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more humans.
> >> It's possible their energies might have been better directed
> >> elsewhere.
> >
> > Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
>
> Not the intended moral of the story. It _is_ sensible to keep an eye
> on sea-levels and make sure you're prepared for them going up.
>
> But it's foolish to think you can prevent them going up, and
> extremely foolish to think you can prevent them going up by cutting
> CO2.
If you're responsible for the cause and can take responsibility for
changing that- to the benefit of your children, grandchildren,
great-grandchildren, etc. then you'd be nucking futz not to do it.
Truly the sins of the fathers are visited upon their children in this
case.
Tim McNamara
flipper <fli...@fish.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 09:27:15 -0600, Tim McNamara
> <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <slrnhhsoq7....@bowser.marioworld>,
> > Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2009-12-08, Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> >> > On Dec 7, 10:25�am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
> >> >> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> >> > Andre Jute wrote:
> >> >> >>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-p
> >> >> >>ers onal...
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the
> >> >> >> Climategate revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort
> >> >> >> to understand the science before he let them use him as a
> >> >> >> front man -- not that he wasn't a tremendously *big* front
> >> >> >> man.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> Andre Jute I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging
> >> >> >> chad time all over again.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question
> >> >> > was on Climategate.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon footprint' of this little
> >> >> > get-together?" S.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ask and ye shall be galled:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe
> >> >> /67 36...
> >> >
> >> > These people are being idiots and the message is going to be
> >> > lost. Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp their
> >> > little feet at the outrageous, but secondary, items like how
> >> > many limos and jets going there. They need a new image to
> >> > promote the message. The earth IS getting warmer, nobody really
> >> > knows why tho. Could be man, could be a natural swing BUT if it
> >> > IS man, and the repub boobs yell, get peoples attention over
> >> > nonsense, then our kids and our kids kids are screwed.
> >>
> >> We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time
> >> pointlessly cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit
> >> higher.
> >>
> >> The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was
> >> their fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more humans.
> >> It's possible their energies might have been better directed
> >> elsewhere.
> >
> >Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
>
> Ah, the siren call of despots: "be scared of the straw man and give
> me the power to rule your lives."
Problem is, this "straw man" is verified by factual data and observation
with many independent sources corroborating. That is to say, it's not a
straw man.
Here's today's data:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8400905.stm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091206162955.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091207165252.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091206183705.htm
Enjoy!
AMuzi
AMuzi
Doing nothing has a certain charm.
Are you advocating mass human sacrifice?
Tim McNamara
AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article <slrnhhsoq7....@bowser.marioworld>,
> > Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2009-12-08, Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> >>> On Dec 7, 10:25 am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
> >>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >>>>> Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-pe
> >>>>>> rs onal... Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the
> >>>>>> Climategate revelations. Yup. He should have made an effort to
> >>>>>> understand the science before he let them use him as a front
> >>>>>> man -- not that he wasn't a tremendously *big* front man.
> >>>>>> Andre Jute I know how the poor bugger feels. It's hanging chad
> >>>>>> time all over again.
> >>>>> Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one question
> >>>>> was on Climategate. Bill "anyone calculate the 'carbon
> >>>>> footprint' of this little get-together?" S.
> >>>> Ask and ye shall be galled:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/
> >>>> 67 36...
> >>> These people are being idiots and the message is going to be
> >>> lost. Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp their
> >>> little feet at the outrageous, but secondary, items like how many
> >>> limos and jets going there. They need a new image to promote the
> >>> message. The earth IS getting warmer, nobody really knows why
> >>> tho. Could be man, could be a natural swing BUT if it IS man, and
> >>> the repub boobs yell, get peoples attention over nonsense, then
> >>> our kids and our kids kids are screwed.
> >> We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time
> >> pointlessly cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit
> >> higher.
> >>
> >> The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was
> >> their fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more humans.
> >> It's possible their energies might have been better directed
> >> elsewhere.
> >
> > Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
>
> Doing nothing has a certain charm. Are you advocating mass human
> sacrifice?
Isn't sacrifice for the future what made the Greatest Generation great?
Unfortunately the current of American power brokers are the Greediest
Generation. "I got mine, everybody else can go jump."
Tim McNamara
AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> Ben C wrote:
> > On 2009-12-08, Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> >> On Dec 7, 10:25 am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
> >>> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >>>> Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-per
> >>>>> sonal... Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation" at the
Or not.
Michael Press
<a7c56b9c-3123-4e0e...@z35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> The earth
> IS getting warmer, nobody really knows why tho.
Since the recession of the North America, Euorpe, and
Siberia ice sheets the warmest climate period was 7000
years ago. Since then the temperature trend is to
cooler temperatures.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png>
--
Michael Press
Bill Sornson
> On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 17:53:52 -0600, Tim McNamara
>
>> with many independent sources corroborating.
>
>
>> That is to say, it's not a
>> straw man.
>
> over the last century and a half because the little ice age ended and
> then, for the last decade, remained stable or slightly declined (as
> they did mid 20'th century), depending on how one smoothes and
> 'interprets' the data. So, of course, everything in the 'not warming'
> recent decade will be (on average) warmer than the preceding despite
> the lack of warming being a direct contradiction of the climate
> models. And if there is never one jot more of warming for the next
> 1,000 years they, too, will be (on average) 'warmer' than the
> preceding century and a half..
>
> The observation is exactly the opposite of what you think because the
> wording is intended to keep you scared of the strawman despite the
> data being in conflict with the strawman.
>
>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091206162955.htm
>
> This one is a cutie. Pay attention to what 'the problem' was. The
> current model of how it's all supposed to work *failed* to match the
> historical record during that period so they had to come up with 'more
> stuff' to supposedly explain it.
>
> Now, on the surface that seems reasonable *but* it means that every
> previous explanation made where the AGW proponents claimed the model
> 'worked', and matched the record, actually do *not* work. Rather than
> a 'corroboration' it's actually another contradiction.
>
> Here's why: if your model without the 'added stuff' supposedly
> 'matches' the historical record 'here' but you need 'added stuff' to
> make it work 'there' then your model doesn't work because it should
> explain *all* the instances without needing to be twiddled around each
> time.
>
> Btw, there's no evidence whatsoever that the 'extra stuff' is valid.
> That's just all they could think of when the model failed, especially
> since the model is a religious 'given' article of faith.
>
>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091207165252.htm
>
> Sorry, but that is just speculation and even the IPCC doesn't agree.
> Which points out, again, that the models, as currently formulated,
> don't work. I.E. If there was a working model you wouldn't be getting
> all these disparate 'predictions'.
>
>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091206183705.htm
>
> Oh, by all means, let's 'worry' about nitrogen too. URGENTLY because
> they haven't a clue about it.
>
> That one is positively classic. They haven't the slightest idea what
> the 'consequences' might be but you know man. We're 'doing something'
> so it *must* be catastrophic and we'll obviously need an even more
> powerful despot to dictate this aspect of your life too.
>
> That's pretty much how the 'global warming' thing started too. There
> simply *must* be something 'wrong' with man using 'oil' so go find
> something.
>
>> Enjoy!
Bill Sornson
> present danger, not because some egotistical pseudo science goons
> falsified data to manufacture a doomsday fantasy.
Funny (sad) thing is, the GWAs literally don't discern a distinction between
the two "causes".
BS (record low temps all over western US today)
Michael Press
flipper <fli...@fish.net> wrote:
> Aw, gee. Now, you see, you're not supposed to do that. You're supposed
> to chop the data off at a propitious point so it looks 'bad'. Like,
> say, cut it off at 1850, around the end of the little ice age, so it's
> 'all up'.
I am having trouble with that; you will have to do the work.
Here, just chop off right halves of these graphs.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ice-core-isotope.png>
--
Michael Press
bjwe...@gmail.com
> On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:37:24 -0800, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> > Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
>
> > > The earth
> > > IS getting warmer, nobody really knows why tho.
>
> >Since the recession of the North America, Euorpe, and
> >Siberia ice sheets the warmest climate period was 7000
> >years ago. Since then the temperature trend is to
> >cooler temperatures.
>
> ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png>
>
> to chop the data off at a propitious point so it looks 'bad'. Like,
> say, cut it off at 1850, around the end of the little ice age, so it's
> 'all up'.
Look at the scale on the x-axis. It's in thousands of years.
The smoothing on that plot is such that it cannot resolve
the last 150 years, which is the only time scale on which
one expects to find a signature of anthropogenic global
warming. It's a problem of scale - you don't use this map
http://www.onlineatlas.us/interstate-highways.htm
to tell whether the exit that leads to my house is a right exit,
left exit, or cloverleaf.
If you look just a bit farther down the page there is a plot
labeled "Reconstructed Temperature"
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
which is the one to look at if you are interested in
short time scale variations, not glacial/interglacial
cycles. This is the plot that the conspiracy theorists
think was made by the Cigarette Smoking Man from
the X-Files.
Ben
Tim McNamara
flipper <fli...@fish.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:36:09 -0600, Tim McNamara
> <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <hfmrt9$al4$3...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Tim McNamara wrote:
> >> > In article <slrnhhsoq7....@bowser.marioworld>,
> >> > Ben C <spam...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 2009-12-08, Qui si parla Campagnolo <pe...@vecchios.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> On Dec 7, 10:25 am, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com> wrote:
> >> >>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> >>>>> Andre Jute wrote:
> >> >>>>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels
> >> >>>>>> -pe rs onal... Apparently Al Bore feels "great irritation"
> >> >>>>>> at the Climategate revelations. Yup. He should have made an
> >> >>>>>> effort to understand the science before he let them use him
> >> >>>>>> as a front man -- not that he wasn't a tremendously *big*
> >> >>>>>> front man. Andre Jute I know how the poor bugger feels.
> >> >>>>>> It's hanging chad time all over again.
> >> >>>>> Funny how he gave an interview this week and not one
> >> >>>>> question was on Climategate. Bill "anyone calculate the
> >> >>>>> 'carbon footprint' of this little get-together?" S.
> >> >>>> Ask and ye shall be galled:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-con
> >> >>>> fe/ 67 36...
> >> >>> These people are being idiots and the message is going to be
> >> >>> lost. Many neocons are going to be able to shout and stamp
> >> >>> their little feet at the outrageous, but secondary, items like
> >> >>> how many limos and jets going there. They need a new image to
> >> >>> promote the message. The earth IS getting warmer, nobody
> >> >>> really knows why tho. Could be man, could be a natural swing
> >> >>> BUT if it IS man, and the repub boobs yell, get peoples
> >> >>> attention over nonsense, then our kids and our kids kids are
> >> >>> screwed.
> >> >> We're also screwed if it isn't man and we waste our time
> >> >> pointlessly cutting CO2 instead of building the dykes a bit
> >> >> higher.
> >> >>
> >> >> The Aztecs assumed the climate change that wiped them out was
> >> >> their fault and the obvious solution was to sacrifice more
> >> >> humans. It's possible their energies might have been better
> >> >> directed elsewhere.
> >> >
> >> > Ah, the siren call of do-nothingism.
> >>
> >> Doing nothing has a certain charm. Are you advocating mass human
> >> sacrifice?
> >
> >Isn't sacrifice for the future what made the Greatest Generation
> >great? Unfortunately the current of American power brokers are the
> >Greediest Generation. "I got mine, everybody else can go jump."
>
> The 'greatest generation' sacrificed because there was a clear and
> present danger, not because some egotistical pseudo science goons
> falsified data to manufacture a doomsday fantasy.
Oops, your tinfoil hat fell off again.
Tim McNamara
flipper <fli...@fish.net> wrote:
> Blah de blah de blah
Repetition != truth. But you've got truthiness down pat, so good luck
with that.
Neil Brooks
> BS (record low temps all over western US today)
Without taking a particular position on the entire GCC issue, I CAN
take a clear and easy position on Sornson:
You need a course in logic ... badly.
Chalo
>
> flipper <flip...@fish.net> wrote:
> > Blah de blah de blah
>
> Repetition != truth. But you've got truthiness down pat, so good luck
> with that.
Refresher on what we are dealing with here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism
Conservatives seem to believe that truth and fact can be subverted as
easily as the political process or free elections. Hence their
denigration of "junk science" when they have nothing that deserves the
name of science (physical, social, or otherwise) to support their
views.
It's true that you can get idiots to buy into your favorite lies, if
you have enough financing to push your message through their feeding
tubes. But idiots never went in for truth and fact anyway.
Chalo
Tim McNamara
Ben C
> http://www.igbp.kva.se/
I like it-- much easier to invent a bogus index and plot graphs of that
shooting up alarmingly than have to go to all that trouble lying with
temperature graphs.
Notice how CO2 level is actually factored into the index (but CO2 level
is not a measure of "climate change" by any stretch of the
imagination).
By the way the "global average temperature" graph on that page looks
suspicious. The basic shape is the same as the UAH data, but with an
offset of almost 0.2C added from around 2003, making 2005 appear warmer
than 1998.
Tim McNamara
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210111156.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091209113840.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210111154.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091209093117.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091203101422.htm
3M's successful efforts at reducing greenhouse gas emissions without
crippling their competitiveness or productivity:
<http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/global/sustainability/manage
ment/climate-change-energy/>
bicycle_disciple
> In article <11vsh5lnflh7hac657durrsidpmns8h...@4ax.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> flipper <flip...@fish.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 09:27:15 -0600, Tim McNamara
> > <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
Didn't NASA release something a while back saying this global warming
is a planetary phenomenon? Mars and Jupiter is also facing warming,
which probably means there is an appreciable component attributable to
activity in the sun.
Tim McNamara
<d37fc06b-c194-4a1c...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
bicycle_disciple <1.crazy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Didn't NASA release something a while back saying this global warming
> is a planetary phenomenon? Mars and Jupiter is also facing warming,
> which probably means there is an appreciable component attributable to
> activity in the sun.
Not that I've been able to find. If you've got a link to a NASA press
release or report, then please cite it.
IIRC when that first came out from the right wing blogosphere it was
about the time that Martian spring was beginning for the Mars rover
missions and it was, for them, warming up as a result of normal seasonal
variation.
If you bothered to check around, you'd find that the total solar
irradiance (the energy output of the Sun) has actually been decreasing
over the past 10 years consistent with its regular cycle; it is
currently at or about its normal minima and should be starting to
increase to its maxima which should be in about 6 years or so.
The end result of this is that the Earth has been warming up while the
Sun has been cooling down. Hmmm. The other "saving grace" is air
pollution reducing the infrared radiation reaching the Earth,
particularly high atmosphere microparticulates which case huge infrared
shadows. Particulates come from both man-made and natural sources (of
the latter, especially volcanoes which put large amounts of particulates
into the air and result in a net cooling effect for a year or two after
large eruptions).
You know where this is going, right? We'll end up seeding the upper
atmosphere with particulates- at taxpayer expense- to reduce global
warming because business and individuals can't be bothered to reduce
their GHG emissions. What can go wrong with that?
What else would one expect from a species stupid enough to deliberately
irradiate its own planet- at all, let alone more than once? And to
stockpile enough nuclear weapons to kill everybody a few dozen times on
the pretense that this makes them safer? Cave men with big shiny toys
is all we still are.
AMuzi
Old news from NASA about martian ice:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/07aug_southpole.htm
Trend:
http://www.mars-ice.org/_more/about/spcrocus.php
Regarding nuclear weapons I must have missed the news that
the Saudi peninsula and Persia are glowing masses of glass.
Tim McNamara
* Still Just Me * <noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:58:10 -0600, Tim McNamara
> <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> >3M's successful efforts at reducing greenhouse gas emissions without
> >crippling their competitiveness or productivity:
> >
> ><http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/global/sustainability/ma
> >nage ment/climate-change-energy/>
>
> Must be made up. It's been stated quite clearly that there's no way
> to do this - therefore the evidence must be false.
And more updates:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091209194242.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091206184749.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210111156.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091211131605.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210173613.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091209113840.htm
Enjoy!
Tim McNamara
AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Thanks for those. From the first:
"Like Earth, Mars has seasons that cause its polar caps to wax and wane.
'It's late spring at the south pole of Mars,' says planetary scientist
Dave Smith of the Goddard Space Flight Center. 'The polar cap is
receding because the springtime sun is shining on it.'"
The second shows no long-term warming trend.
So, like I said.
> Regarding nuclear weapons I must have missed the news that the Saudi
> peninsula and Persia are glowing masses of glass.
There's no reason to pretend to be an idiot, Andy.
Tim McNamara
Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
I apologize for that, it was just rude and uncalled for.
AMuzi
I wasn't offended.
Ya gotta wonder about the net ROI on our expensive nukes...
Chalo
>
> Tim McNamara wrote:
> >
> > Tim McNamara wrote:
> >>
> >> AMuzi wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Regarding nuclear weapons I must have missed the news that the
> >>> Saudi peninsula and Persia are glowing masses of glass.
> >> There's no reason to pretend to be an idiot, Andy.
> >
> > I apologize for that, it was just rude and uncalled for.
>
> I wasn't offended.
> Ya gotta wonder about the net ROI on our expensive nukes...
I just did a calculation for the cost of the plutonium in an economy-
size nuke-- you know, the minimum sort of nuke you might buy at Home
Depot as a household defensive deterrent. It turns out that takes
about 13kg of plutonium. Plutonium costs about $4000 per gram. So
you're in for $52 million just to get enough of the active
ingredient. Not including packaging, handling, or delivery!
Spring for a few mid-sized and luxury nukes and multiply the lot by a
thousand, and now you're talking real money. And all for a scary
Halloween costume that made all your friends think you were a total
creep.
Chalo
Tim McNamara
AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Well, thanks for saying. I felt bad as soon as I hit "send." Then I
waited to read it and it seemed even worse.
> Ya gotta wonder about the net ROI on our expensive nukes...
That is a good point. Even deciding how to measure ROI would be an
interesting discussion. It's a little like buying unicorn repellent.
"See any unicorns? No? That's how good it works."
Reagan had a fundamental BGO which is hard to argue with: the very
existence of nuclear weapons is a threat to the survival of humanity.
One is too many and 100,000 are not enough.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/11149806.html
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1890189,00.html