Posted by aluckyguess on January 24, 2010, 12:07 am
>> http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
> Good for you, Frank, a real citation.
> If you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
> then, maybe, we can have a conversation.
> Does not knowing the values of the variable in the equation N=N*fp ne fl
> fi fc fL change its' veracity?
> If species that we know are going extinct, why wouldn't species of which
> we are unaware, not going extinct?
> Whether you numb your brain on my cite or not, we still are left with
> the choices of (1) acting against greenhouse gas emissions (and look
> silly if "global warming' isn't happening), or (2) not acting against
> greenhouse gas emissions (causing unprecedented death and destruction
> around the world).
> Tell me, Frank, which bet would you prefer to lose?
> --
If the earth was cooling (as thought in the 70's and 80's) would you be
trying to burn more fossils fuels?
A slight warming is actually a good thing,(natural occurrence) it gives
more land to grow things that are needed for an expanding population.
In the next 100 years technology will completely change everything as we
know it.
Make believe greenhouse gas emissions isn't going to cause unprecedented
death and destruction.
Posted by Wildbilly on January 24, 2010, 1:17 am
> >
> >> http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
> >
> > Good for you, Frank, a real citation.
> > If you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
> > then, maybe, we can have a conversation.
> >
> > Does not knowing the values of the variable in the equation N=N*fp ne fl
> > fi fc fL change its' veracity?
> >
> > If species that we know are going extinct, why wouldn't species of which
> > we are unaware, not going extinct?
> >
> > Whether you numb your brain on my cite or not, we still are left with
> > the choices of (1) acting against greenhouse gas emissions (and look
> > silly if "global warming' isn't happening), or (2) not acting against
> > greenhouse gas emissions (causing unprecedented death and destruction
> > around the world).
> >
> > Tell me, Frank, which bet would you prefer to lose?
>
> > --
>
> If the earth was cooling (as thought in the 70's and 80's) would you be
> trying to burn more fossils fuels?
> A slight warming is actually a good thing,(natural occurrence) it gives
> more land to grow things that are needed for an expanding population.
> In the next 100 years technology will completely change everything as we
> know it.
> Make believe greenhouse gas emissions isn't going to cause unprecedented
> death and destruction.
http://www.caenvirothon.com/Resources/Mann,%20et%20al.%20Global%20scale%2
0temp%20patterns.pdf
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch06.pdf
Who you gonna believe? A science fiction writer that lives on publicity,
or some nondescript scientists, that tells it the way that they sees it?
Again, the worst case scenarios:
(1) Spend what little money that we have left to suppress greenhouse
gases, and risk derision for being gullible fools, or
(2) Do nothing to prevent the misery and death that "global warming"
will bring.
Nobody has a financial gain, but there could be some financial loses for
those that use fossil fuels.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_arresting_activists
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines
Posted by David Hare-Scott on January 24, 2010, 2:51 am
Wildbilly wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
>>>
>>> Good for you, Frank, a real citation.
>>> If you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
>>> then, maybe, we can have a conversation.
>>>
>>> Does not knowing the values of the variable in the equation N=N*fp
>>> ne fl fi fc fL change its' veracity?
>>>
>>> If species that we know are going extinct, why wouldn't species of
>>> which we are unaware, not going extinct?
>>>
>>> Whether you numb your brain on my cite or not, we still are left
>>> with the choices of (1) acting against greenhouse gas emissions
>>> (and look silly if "global warming' isn't happening), or (2) not
>>> acting against greenhouse gas emissions (causing unprecedented
>>> death and destruction around the world).
>>>
>>> Tell me, Frank, which bet would you prefer to lose?
>>
>>> --
>>
>> If the earth was cooling (as thought in the 70's and 80's) would you
>> be trying to burn more fossils fuels?
>> A slight warming is actually a good thing,(natural occurrence) it
>> gives more land to grow things that are needed for an expanding
>> population. In the next 100 years technology will completely change
>> everything as we know it.
>> Make believe greenhouse gas emissions isn't going to cause
>> unprecedented death and destruction.
> http://www.caenvirothon.com/Resources/Mann,%20et%20al.%20Global%20scale%2
> 0temp%20patterns.pdf
> http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
> http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch06.pdf
> Who you gonna believe? A science fiction writer that lives on
> publicity, or some nondescript scientists, that tells it the way that
> they sees it?
> Again, the worst case scenarios:
> (1) Spend what little money that we have left to suppress greenhouse
> gases, and risk derision for being gullible fools, or
> (2) Do nothing to prevent the misery and death that "global warming"
> will bring.
> Nobody has a financial gain, but there could be some financial loses
> for those that use fossil fuels.
He is yanking your chain.
David
Posted by Wildbilly on January 24, 2010, 12:13 pm
> Wildbilly wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>> http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
> >>>
> >>> Good for you, Frank, a real citation.
> >>> If you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
> >>> then, maybe, we can have a conversation.
> >>>
> >>> Does not knowing the values of the variable in the equation N=N*fp
> >>> ne fl fi fc fL change its' veracity?
> >>>
> >>> If species that we know are going extinct, why wouldn't species of
> >>> which we are unaware, not going extinct?
> >>>
> >>> Whether you numb your brain on my cite or not, we still are left
> >>> with the choices of (1) acting against greenhouse gas emissions
> >>> (and look silly if "global warming' isn't happening), or (2) not
> >>> acting against greenhouse gas emissions (causing unprecedented
> >>> death and destruction around the world).
> >>>
> >>> Tell me, Frank, which bet would you prefer to lose?
> >>
> >>> --
> >>
> >> If the earth was cooling (as thought in the 70's and 80's) would you
> >> be trying to burn more fossils fuels?
> >> A slight warming is actually a good thing,(natural occurrence) it
> >> gives more land to grow things that are needed for an expanding
> >> population. In the next 100 years technology will completely change
> >> everything as we know it.
> >> Make believe greenhouse gas emissions isn't going to cause
> >> unprecedented death and destruction.
> >
> > http://www.caenvirothon.com/Resources/Mann,%20et%20al.%20Global%20scale%2
> > 0temp%20patterns.pdf
> >
> > http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
> >
> > http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch06.pdf
> >
> > Who you gonna believe? A science fiction writer that lives on
> > publicity, or some nondescript scientists, that tells it the way that
> > they sees it?
> >
> > Again, the worst case scenarios:
> > (1) Spend what little money that we have left to suppress greenhouse
> > gases, and risk derision for being gullible fools, or
> >
> > (2) Do nothing to prevent the misery and death that "global warming"
> > will bring.
> >
> > Nobody has a financial gain, but there could be some financial loses
> > for those that use fossil fuels.
>
> He is yanking your chain.
>
> David
Possibly, or he could be a corporate stooge, or just dumb.
On the gardening front, my two stevia plants that survived over winter
last year under two 24" T5 florescent lights, are thriving under 4 48"
T5s this year.
Hoping to start geminating spinach, kale, Swiss chard, and peas this
week. When May gets here I want to have some large plants to put in the
ground.
I've mulched the beds (a little over 600 sq. ft.) and sown rye and
buckwheat, which will get cut and covered over with a fresh layer of
alfalfa (lucern), two weeks before planting.
How's your garden coming along this year? Is your water holding up?
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_arresting_activists
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines
XML site map
> Good for you, Frank, a real citation.
> If you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
> then, maybe, we can have a conversation.
> Does not knowing the values of the variable in the equation N=N*fp ne fl
> fi fc fL change its' veracity?
> If species that we know are going extinct, why wouldn't species of which
> we are unaware, not going extinct?
> Whether you numb your brain on my cite or not, we still are left with
> the choices of (1) acting against greenhouse gas emissions (and look
> silly if "global warming' isn't happening), or (2) not acting against
> greenhouse gas emissions (causing unprecedented death and destruction
> around the world).
> Tell me, Frank, which bet would you prefer to lose?
> --