{BS} I am fearful...
in [Toyota]
|
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 15 Dec 2009 01:14 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:55:33 -0500, tak wrote: > > "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message > news:pan.2009.12.15.02.27.11.626032(a)e86.GTS... >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:38:18 -0500, tak wrote: >> >> >>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>> news:pan.2009.12.15.00.08.31.230393(a)e86.GTS... >>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:36:38 -0500, tak wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>> This is ridiculous. He keeps trying to indoctrinate me that it's >>>>>>>> all Our fault, and ignores the evidence presented to him that it >>>>>>>> all happened many times before now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unbelievable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Incredible! >>>>>> >>>>>> Absolutely. I'm still waiting for someone to tell what caused the >>>>>> last five climate change cycles, before Man had an impact, if any. >>>>>> >>>>> no, not that >>>> >>>> I see everybody rushing in with answers. >>>> >>>> Are you getting ready for the "Christmas Story" marathon? You know the >>>> part where the kid says "Ohhhhhh....Fuuuuuuuudge....but I didn't say >>>> fudge..." and then the mother gets on the phone and tells his friend's >>>> mother what he said, and you hear over the phone..."NO! NOT THAT!!!" >>>> >>>> >>> Nope, I'll stick with incredible!!!! >> >> I know, isn't it? >> >> After all that has come out about Global Warming, people still think >> it's caused by humans. >> >> Now that you see that, you should help people to understand that it >> happens all the time. Well, Geologically speaking, that is. >> >> Glad to see you finally understand. >> > Sorry, it's you who doesn't understand, incredible simply refers to how > well your children turned out. What is it I don't understand? No one has been able to explain it yet, and I have fully supported my position that the "warmers" are so warm because it's squirting out their ears. I expected more of you, but I see you're as closed-minded as the rest of the "Global Warming" crowd. 650,000 years of data does *nothing* to sway you at all? That's really sad, considering all the warming crowd has is conjecture. Even they are starting to say "...ooops..."
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 15 Dec 2009 08:22 "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:pan.2009.12.15.06.14.27.327206(a)e86.GTS... > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:55:33 -0500, tak wrote: > >> >> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >> news:pan.2009.12.15.02.27.11.626032(a)e86.GTS... >>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:38:18 -0500, tak wrote: >>> >>> >>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>> news:pan.2009.12.15.00.08.31.230393(a)e86.GTS... >>>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:36:38 -0500, tak wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is ridiculous. He keeps trying to indoctrinate me that it's >>>>>>>>> all Our fault, and ignores the evidence presented to him that it >>>>>>>>> all happened many times before now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unbelievable. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Incredible! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Absolutely. I'm still waiting for someone to tell what caused the >>>>>>> last five climate change cycles, before Man had an impact, if any. >>>>>>> >>>>>> no, not that >>>>> >>>>> I see everybody rushing in with answers. >>>>> >>>>> Are you getting ready for the "Christmas Story" marathon? You know the >>>>> part where the kid says "Ohhhhhh....Fuuuuuuuudge....but I didn't say >>>>> fudge..." and then the mother gets on the phone and tells his friend's >>>>> mother what he said, and you hear over the phone..."NO! NOT THAT!!!" >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Nope, I'll stick with incredible!!!! >>> >>> I know, isn't it? >>> >>> After all that has come out about Global Warming, people still think >>> it's caused by humans. >>> >>> Now that you see that, you should help people to understand that it >>> happens all the time. Well, Geologically speaking, that is. >>> >>> Glad to see you finally understand. >>> >> Sorry, it's you who doesn't understand, incredible simply refers to how >> well your children turned out. > > What is it I don't understand? > > No one has been able to explain it yet, and I have fully supported my > position that the "warmers" are so warm because it's squirting out their > ears. > > I expected more of you, but I see you're as closed-minded as the rest of > the "Global Warming" crowd. > > 650,000 years of data does *nothing* to sway you at all? > That's really sad, considering all the warming crowd has is conjecture. > Even they are starting to say "...ooops..." Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. You're a genius. Really. You make complex things so easy to understand. Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. Anything that cannot be explained does not exist. Everyone chant.
From: tak on 15 Dec 2009 13:20 "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:pan.2009.12.15.06.14.27.327206(a)e86.GTS... > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:55:33 -0500, tak wrote: > >> >> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >> news:pan.2009.12.15.02.27.11.626032(a)e86.GTS... >>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:38:18 -0500, tak wrote: >>> >>> >>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>> news:pan.2009.12.15.00.08.31.230393(a)e86.GTS... >>>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:36:38 -0500, tak wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is ridiculous. He keeps trying to indoctrinate me that it's >>>>>>>>> all Our fault, and ignores the evidence presented to him that it >>>>>>>>> all happened many times before now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unbelievable. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Incredible! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Absolutely. I'm still waiting for someone to tell what caused the >>>>>>> last five climate change cycles, before Man had an impact, if any. >>>>>>> >>>>>> no, not that >>>>> >>>>> I see everybody rushing in with answers. >>>>> >>>>> Are you getting ready for the "Christmas Story" marathon? You know the >>>>> part where the kid says "Ohhhhhh....Fuuuuuuuudge....but I didn't say >>>>> fudge..." and then the mother gets on the phone and tells his friend's >>>>> mother what he said, and you hear over the phone..."NO! NOT THAT!!!" >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Nope, I'll stick with incredible!!!! >>> >>> I know, isn't it? >>> >>> After all that has come out about Global Warming, people still think >>> it's caused by humans. >>> >>> Now that you see that, you should help people to understand that it >>> happens all the time. Well, Geologically speaking, that is. >>> >>> Glad to see you finally understand. >>> >> Sorry, it's you who doesn't understand, incredible simply refers to how >> well your children turned out. > > What is it I don't understand? > > No one has been able to explain it yet, and I have fully supported my > position that the "warmers" are so warm because it's squirting out their > ears. > > I expected more of you, but I see you're as closed-minded as the rest of > the "Global Warming" crowd. > > 650,000 years of data does *nothing* to sway you at all? > That's really sad, considering all the warming crowd has is conjecture. > Even they are starting to say "...ooops..." > YOU'RE disappointed? I've read information on both sides of this controversy and find the "warmers" arguments more compelling than the "deniers". I say More because the empirical evidence supports the "warmers" not the "deniers". The real issue for me is if you and yours are correct, no harm done. If, however, Man's contribution to global warming is just enough to provide that irreversible tipping point, we don't have a backup planet to flee to, do we? You didn't like Venus, too hot you said. What is really pathetic is how easily the Big Money Folks can manipulate you (in the plural since) Who profits from the status quo in energy? Big Oil (includes Cartel Countries) Who profits from the status quo in health care. Big Insurance Companies. Hell, even the tobacco companies put up a good fight against all odds by manipulating data and people.
From: Tegger on 15 Dec 2009 14:14 "tak" <jkirch(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in news:ErQVm.66436$Wd1.42110(a)newsfe15.iad: > > I've read information on both sides of this controversy and find the > "warmers" arguments more compelling than the "deniers". Your standards of proof are very low, then. The "warmers'" information has been abundantly and emphatically proven to be incomplete, cherry-picked, distorted, and largely secret. This was first shown by Bjorn Lomborg, originally a Believer. He became the Skeptical Environmentalist when he discovered, quite to his shock, just how bad the Believers' data really was. When he called for better methodology and more rigorous science, he was vilified by the Believers and is now considered a near-outcast. Then came McIntyre and McKittrick, who showed that Mike Mann's famous "hockey stick graph" was created by a computer model that was fatally flawed and produced a "hockey stick" pretty much no matter what raw data was actually fed into it. Then came Vincent Courtillot, who showed that averaging weather station data daily rather than monthly, and using real-world measurements only instead of guesses, produced a completely different result from the official IPCC graphs. The Believers' computer models do not work when they try to predict past weather events, even when fed actual observed data. The Believers' computer models ignore clouds and water vapor, which are well-known to have an effect on weather as great as (or greater than) carbon dioxide or other "greenhouse gases". The Believers are not very compelling given all that and more, frankly. -- Tegger
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 15 Dec 2009 14:19
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:20:16 -0500, tak wrote: > > "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message > news:pan.2009.12.15.06.14.27.327206(a)e86.GTS... >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:55:33 -0500, tak wrote: >> >> >>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>> news:pan.2009.12.15.02.27.11.626032(a)e86.GTS... >>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:38:18 -0500, tak wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>>> news:pan.2009.12.15.00.08.31.230393(a)e86.GTS... >>>>>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:36:38 -0500, tak wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is ridiculous. He keeps trying to indoctrinate me that it's >>>>>>>>>> all Our fault, and ignores the evidence presented to him that it >>>>>>>>>> all happened many times before now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Unbelievable. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Incredible! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Absolutely. I'm still waiting for someone to tell what caused the >>>>>>>> last five climate change cycles, before Man had an impact, if any. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> no, not that >>>>>> >>>>>> I see everybody rushing in with answers. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you getting ready for the "Christmas Story" marathon? You know >>>>>> the part where the kid says "Ohhhhhh....Fuuuuuuuudge....but I didn't >>>>>> say fudge..." and then the mother gets on the phone and tells his >>>>>> friend's mother what he said, and you hear over the phone..."NO! NOT >>>>>> THAT!!!" >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Nope, I'll stick with incredible!!!! >>>> >>>> I know, isn't it? >>>> >>>> After all that has come out about Global Warming, people still think >>>> it's caused by humans. >>>> >>>> Now that you see that, you should help people to understand that it >>>> happens all the time. Well, Geologically speaking, that is. >>>> >>>> Glad to see you finally understand. >>>> >>> Sorry, it's you who doesn't understand, incredible simply refers to how >>> well your children turned out. >> >> What is it I don't understand? >> >> No one has been able to explain it yet, and I have fully supported my >> position that the "warmers" are so warm because it's squirting out their >> ears. >> >> I expected more of you, but I see you're as closed-minded as the rest of >> the "Global Warming" crowd. >> >> 650,000 years of data does *nothing* to sway you at all? That's really >> sad, considering all the warming crowd has is conjecture. Even they are >> starting to say "...ooops..." >> > YOU'RE disappointed? > > I've read information on both sides of this controversy and find the > "warmers" arguments more compelling than the "deniers". I say More because > the empirical evidence supports the "warmers" not the "deniers". The real > issue for me is if you and yours are correct, no harm done. If, however, > Man's contribution to global warming is just enough to provide that > irreversible tipping point, we don't have a backup planet to flee to, do > we? You didn't like Venus, too hot you said. However, I have NEVER said we should not try to reduce the amount of CO2 *WE ARE* spewing into the atmosphere! Here's an interesting juxtaposition for you: ~40 years ago, Earth scientists were saying if we did not reduce the amount of pollution, we whoudl be facing Global Cooling. I remember this from when I was a kid, coupled with a picture of the LA skyline immersed in smog. OK, so we reduced the amount of pollutants, particularly in cars. We have a PCV in place of an 'oil breather', that released the smoke produced by whatever oil burns back into the intake, rather than allowed to vent into the atmosphere (I also remember, for some reason, the Ford Falcon was a particular offender. I used to see those belching clouds of oil smoke when they were NEW!) Now all of a sudden it's warming? In light of the evidence presented, geologically, it is TIME for a warming period! Perhaps man added a little to it, but the long-term empirical data suggest that these periods of warming are immediately followed by cooling, in fact, much colder than the warming. Why *this* data is being ignored escapes me. > > What is really pathetic is how easily the Big Money Folks can manipulate > you (in the plural since) Not at all. I wrote a paper for a High School geology class, based upon evidenced gathered by *myself*, from various publications such as Scientific American and others, that the Earth was experiencing a mid-term temperate period and that the next phase of the cycle, a cooling phase, would begin within 5-10,000 years. This was before the Vostok Ice Core sample had been taken; indeed, the Vostok data merely strengthens a position I had taken when I was 18. We didn't have that data in 1975. I was saying we were in for a term of glaciation similar to what happened 12,000 years ago. According to the data gathered from the Vostok ice core, I underestimated how COLD it's going to get. Vastly underestimated. If the cycle repeats as it has every 100,000 years, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Vostok-ice-core-petit.png So far, the temperature has only risen +2 (comparative) degrees C. The average drop is -7 degrees C, and that is enough to cover about 1/3 to 1/2 of the globe in ice. The only data that was available in 1975 was for the past 60,000 years. Also, the warmers are pointing to the amount of dust in the atmosphere as proof it's going to get warmer. The chart shows quite the opposite: the more dust, the COLDER it gets. *I* don't need the Big Money folks. And, besides that, the Big Money is being shifted to the warmers. > > Who profits from the status quo in energy? Big Oil (includes Cartel > Countries) If the timing of the Vostok sample is accurate, Big Oil is going to profit quite nicely, that is, if there is any oil left to burn by the time it gets *really* cold. These periods are also accompanied by major snowfalls and clouding. That lets Solar power out of the equation. However, they are accompanied by strong winds, as the warm sections try to stay warm. Wind power is one way to go, if the developers can get past the Small Minds inhabiting the area where I live. > > Who profits from the status quo in health care. Big Insurance Companies. > > Hell, even the tobacco companies put up a good fight against all odds by > manipulating data and people. What's 'tobacco'? http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/35024990/aview/Big_510.jpg |