A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Global Warming



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #301  
Old April 22nd 08, 06:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Robert Chung
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Global Warming

On Apr 22, 10:29 am, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

You have to be aware that the temperature monitoring stations have gone from
being in clear countryside with farmland or forest around them to being
inside of city limits or suburban areas. This has caused a definite increase
in MONITORED temperatures that hasn't been (and cannot intelligently be)
corrected for. Individual stations all over the world have shown no changes
or even downward trends. What's more, it isn't known if "global temperature
averages" even mean anything at all.


I believe you're referring to #19 on this list:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

At other times, you've also used #1, #6, #11, #15, #18, #23, and #26.
Plus, that "Marco Polo sailed to the North Pole" thing.
Ads
  #302  
Old April 22nd 08, 07:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
William Asher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,930
Default Global Warming

Howard Kveck wrote:


RBR protocol says that should be "tapped" rather than "nailed."
Unless you really did nail this person.


Ok, tapped. I like "nailed" because David Letterman once said a highlight
of a Clinton State of the Union address was when Clinton pointed out all
the women he had nailed in the gallery. It seemed so very presidential.
Of course, "tapping" gets used in "The Usual Suspects" so that has a cool
history as well.

--
Bill Asher
  #303  
Old April 22nd 08, 08:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
William Asher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,930
Default Global Warming

Jack Hollis wrote:

On 22 Apr 2008 00:11:06 GMT, William Asher wrote:

My point is that you don't and didn't have any
personal recollection of what climate scientists said in the 70's any
more than you know what they are saying today.



Your point is wrong. I remember the media reporting that scientists
were predicting that we were headed for an ice age. These reports
persisted for a few years and were reported in multiple news sources.

I would also be interested to know how you know what I remember or
don't remember.


Jack:

Here is what you said:

"Actually Bill, very few people would deny that it has some impact.
However, the question is how much.

Unfortunately, the earth's climate is so complex that science is
unable to prove the point one way or the other.

I'm old enough to remember the climatologists warning that we were
heading for an ice age in the 1970s, so I'm skeptical of anything they
say."

Now I find that instead of you remembering what climatologists said, you
are in fact remembering what the media said climatologists said. That is
very different, and, as has been demonstrated by the climatologists at
RealClimate.org, what the media were reporting was not in fact what the
climatologists were saying. If you had bothered to read the
RealClimate.org article you would understand this. But you didn't, so you
look, well, silly. That you weren't "remembering" what actual
climatologists had said is precisely my point. Your memory of historical
fact is faulty and clearly not objective. Since you have demonstrated your
non-objectivity, as far as I am concerned it casts grave doubts on your
ability to objectively analyze the science associated with climate change.
You ought to be very nervous about your intellectual position when Kunich
is agreeing with you.

--
Bill Asher
  #304  
Old April 22nd 08, 08:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
William Asher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,930
Default Global Warming

Tom Kunich wrote:

"Jack Hollis" wrote in message
...

So when it comes to human and global warming, I'm an agnostic. It's
the only sensible way to look at it.


http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki...Change_Rev_png



Tom:

Are you using that graph to show that paleo climate is really complicated?
If you are, one of the things you should focus on is the Paleocene-Eocene
Thermal Maximum (PETM) section, and the explanation below on that page.
Note how this very large positive temperature excursion is thought to be
due to forcing from methane (a greenhouse gas) due to destabilization of
methane hydrates. Did you know that one predicted effect of global warming
is destabilization of methane hydrates? So yeah, duh, climate is variable,
but even within the "natural" variability there are more than enough signs
that it is rarely a good idea to dumps a lot of excess radiatively active
gas into the atmosphere.

Precisely what were you getting at with this figure? That Jack's "only
sensible way to look at it" is basically an ostrich-like approach to the
problem or are you simply reaffirming my core belief that both you and Jack
know diddly about climate physics?

--
Bill Asher
  #305  
Old April 23rd 08, 12:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default Global Warming

In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

"Jack Hollis" wrote in message
...
On 22 Apr 2008 00:11:06 GMT, William Asher wrote:

You are simply repeating what
you were told today by paid climate skeptics who play people like you like
cheap fiddles. They say, you parrot, and it gives you some measure of
reassurance to continue on with your lifestyle.


Complete rubbish.


What is really funny is this sort of crap coming from someone touting
"reports" from the UN in which the "study" directors REWROTE sections of
other scientists reports and made absolutely false claims concerning the
opinions of those other scientists.


What is *really* funny is the number of times this assertion has been knocked down
yet you persist in making it.

--
tanx,
Howard

Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #306  
Old April 23rd 08, 01:03 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Jack Hollis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 397
Default Global Warming

On 22 Apr 2008 19:05:00 GMT, William Asher wrote:

Now I find that instead of you remembering what climatologists said, you
are in fact remembering what the media said climatologists said. That is
very different, and, as has been demonstrated by the climatologists at
RealClimate.org, what the media were reporting was not in fact what the
climatologists were saying.



The media was right that climate scientists were predicting that the
earth was heading for an ice age. That fact has been proven.

I'm not even ready to say that they were wrong, because for all we
know the earth might be heading for an ice age.

This is becoming tedious. The fact that science is unable to prove
how much human are contributing to the current warming trend, if at
all, is undisputable. And anyone who thinks that science can, doesn't
understand science.

I have no more to say on the issue.
  #307  
Old April 23rd 08, 09:48 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Donald Munro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,811
Default Global Warming

Jack Hollis wrote:
The media was right that climate scientists were predicting that the earth
was heading for an ice age. That fact has been proven.


If you take the view that a small minority represents all climate
scientists then the "fact" is "proven". You might even find a few
biologists who "believe" in intelligent design

Given the fact that there were no super computers able to provide climate
models in the 1970's its hardly surprising that some got it wrong.

  #308  
Old April 23rd 08, 02:10 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Robert Chung
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Global Warming

On Apr 22, 5:03 pm, Jack Hollis wrote:

I have no more to say on the issue.


"More?"
  #309  
Old May 10th 08, 03:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Robert Chung
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Global Warming

On Apr 15, 7:34 pm, "Carl Sundquist" wrote:


It's quite likely Jim Bob Dugger from Arkansas.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...chive/2005/10/...

Although they're up to 17 kids (currently).


Order up more Tater Tots. No. 18 on the way:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNE710JVDR.DTL
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Damn Global Warming Tom Kunich Racing 16 February 9th 08 05:44 AM
A little global warming WeaselPoopPower Racing 1 November 16th 07 07:47 AM
Global Warming Tom Kunich Racing 212 November 16th 07 03:41 AM
Global Warming Richard Bates UK 84 July 25th 04 11:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.