Who was it said the planet was cooling?
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: The Crest Re-Opens!
Next: Solstice Party
From: Rob Kleinschmidt on 9 Dec 2009 22:13 On Dec 9, 6:27 pm, "Bob Myers" <nospample...(a)address.invalid> wrote: > don (Calgary) wrote: > > The report was updated in 2009 and I believe over > > 700 scientists are now expressing similar concerns. > > Let' see - just what fraction of that population that call themselves > "scientists" do you think the number "700" represents? Roughly the same as the fraction of "architects and engineers" subscribing to Henry's demolition theories ?
From: S'mee on 9 Dec 2009 22:43 On Dec 9, 1:25 pm, Keith <NotOnYourL...(a)nospam.com> wrote: > "S'mee" <stevenkei...(a)hotmail.com> wrote innews:d8812f37-d3fc-4bb0-91dd-631143d69ea3(a)y32g2000prd.googlegroups.co > m: > > > i know...but I couldn't remember the name AND it isn't confirmed. > > Like you said "MAY make the Marianas trench the second deepest > > place on earth" I await the results...but I am most assuredly NOT > > holding my breath. > > Just wait a while; a certain someone will Google it and hence become an > expert, then tell how his ancestors found it and in fact participated > in the digging of it. > Oh that hack....I doubt that he actully rides.
From: S'mee on 9 Dec 2009 22:44 On Dec 9, 1:47 pm, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote: > Keith wrote: > > "S'mee" <stevenkei...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in > >news:d8812f37-d3fc-4bb0-91dd-631143d69ea3(a)y32g2000prd.googlegroups.co > > m: > > >> i know...but I couldn't remember the name AND it isn't confirmed. > >> Like you said "MAY make the Marianas trench the second deepest > >> place on earth" I await the results...but I am most assuredly NOT > >> holding my breath. > > > Just wait a while; a certain someone will Google it and hence become > > an expert, then tell how his ancestors found it and in fact > > participated in the digging of it. > > Flashing on headlines--"bathyscaphe dives to deepest point in ocean--finds > skinhead strapped unused Harley--foul play applauded". Well, one can dream. How about change the Harley to "K-Car" I'd suggest a Yugo but they don't weigh enough.
From: S'mee on 9 Dec 2009 22:45 On Dec 9, 4:48 pm, "Beav" <beavis.origi...(a)ntlwoxorld.com> wrote: > "Road Glidin' Don" <d.lan...(a)gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:0f7a3831-e347-4cef-bd2f-0b8d9592751b(a)z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 8, 12:23 pm, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older > > > > > > Gentleman) wrote: > > Twibil <nowayjo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 8, 8:37 am, "TOG(a)Toil" <totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > Pah! American chilli - weak, insipid stuff, barely worthy of the name. > > > > I have to serve mine in a Faraday cage..... > > > > Your poor excuse for chili needs to be shielded from electromagnetic > > > fields? > > > > Good strong American Chili (note caps) puts out an EMP strong enough > > > to scramble brains at three feet, and *melts* Faraday cages. > > > Oh yeah? Well, the last time I made mine they scrambled fighter jets. > > F18s. In the USA, three thousand miles away... > > > ...and I was told it contravened several bacteriological warfare > > treaties. > >The Brits must make the strongest chili. Look what it's done to their > >teeth! > > I'd best stay away from chili then, or it may turn my teeth into flourescent > white. > True, But your taste buds will love you for it.
From: don (Calgary) on 9 Dec 2009 23:20
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:27:56 -0700, "Bob Myers" <nospamplease(a)address.invalid> wrote: >don (Calgary) wrote: >> In fact more and more of the world's scientists are questioning the >> validity of the science. The US Senate Minority report of 2007 listed >> 450 prominent scientists, many of the them current and former IPCC >> scientists, who are questioning the basic science behind the global >> warming theories. The report was updated in 2009 and I believe over >> 700 scientists are now expressing similar concerns. > >Let' see - just what fraction of that population that call themselves >"scientists" do you think the number "700" represents? Well it represents 700 more than there was five years ago. This issue is not a popularity contest. It's not a matter of you line up your experts on one side of the wall and I'll line up mine on the other. The point here is there are well respected members of the scientific community who are questioning the science supporting the global warming theory. > >Secondly, and as I believe Pete was pointing out in the first place - >the "basic science behind the global warming theories" is not really >the primary concern here (since those basically have to do with the >ever-popular "is mankind to blame?" question). Well if we are being asked to pay a large financial penalty for our prior production of greenhouse gasses and place our economy and basic way of life in jeopardy in an effort to solve global warming by reducing our production of greenhouse gasses, I think the question of the cause is important. >Regardless of the >theories which attempt to explain it, the observed fact is - as was >correctly pointed out - that the Earth IS warming, and Bad Things >(such as the ice caps and glaciers receding, etc.) are in fact >happening. Ya see, that's what we in the science end of things >note as the difference between "hypotheses" and "theories" on the >one hand, and "observed facts" on the other. The theories that >attempt to explain these particular observations have nothing at >all to do with the fact that the observations themselves are real, and >in a very practical sense are important only so far as they help to >answer the question, "is there anything we can do about this?" > I guess I do not blindly accept bad things will happen. Are you suggesting nothing good will come from the planet being slightly warmer? Everything will be bad. Not too far from where I live I can walk up to one of those receding glaciers. As you walk from the road,there are markers in the ground denoting where the glacier was at various points in time since the turn of the last century. It is interesting to see the rate of recession is not consistent, nor has it significantly accelerated in the last two decades. I know it is but one example and may not represent glaciers in other corners of the world, but it is one I can see and touch. Aside from all that, there is a growing sentiment in the scientific community that the link between man made greenhouse gasses and global warming may not be the cause and effect the media has made it out to be. As for if there is anything we can do about it. Please tell me how transferring large volumes of cash, unconditionally, from developed nations like Canada and the US, to undeveloped nations, will serve to lower the temperature of this planet. I would like to hear someone make that connection. Then enlighten me as to just what fraction of the population that call themselves scientists, who are currently gathering in Copenhagen, and are trying to convince the leaders of the free world that is exactly what they have to do to save the planet. Considering the actions they are advocating, I have to question their motives. |