I'm Getting Tired of Shoveling All of This Global Warming

[Sgt Schultz]

"Doug Zellmer column: Record snow steals spotlight from frigid temperatures"
http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20090110/OSH04/90109104
"Record snow during December in Oshkosh spawned a lot of conversation that’s kept the hot stove weather league going this winter."

"Let’s push aside the 39 inches of the white stuff from last month and talk about the cold weather. Just in case you didn’t notice the temperature while shoveling, December was much colder than normal in Oshkosh.

The average temperature in December was 15.8 degrees, which makes it the 10th coldest December in the city since weather records were kept starting in the 1880s, said officials from the National Weather Service in Green Bay. For about the first three weeks of December it was cold enough for the month to flirt with the top five coldest Decembers recorded in Oshkosh.

By the way, calculating the average temperature is pretty simple. The NWS adds the high and the low for each day and then divides by two.

The 15.8 degree average was a whopping 6.3 degrees below normal for December. Oshkosh had nine days with below zero temperatures last month, according to the NWS and Northwestern weather observations.

Our December weather reminded me of some of the harsh winters on the farm while growing up in the 1950s and 1960s. I knew it was really cold outside when frost built up on the inside walls of our dairy barn. I didn’t need a thermometer to remind me of the cold.

One bitter cold winter day I recall like it was yesterday. It was Dec. 31, 1967 when the Packers played the Dallas Cowboys in Green Bay for the National Football League title in the “Ice Bowl” game. The temperature was something like minus 15 with a biting wind, so we did chores early. Frost was maybe an inch thick on some of the inside barn walls. Our dairy cows only stayed outside about 15 minutes that day. The cow’s breath seemed to cling to the outside air.

What was really a bummer during cold weather is when the manure spreader broke. That happened to us a few times during the winter and it was no fun standing out in the cold trying to fix it. My dad could take a lot of cold, but when it was below zero he didn’t appreciate a break down.

Somehow, I have a feeling this winter has a lot roar left in it. Hang on tight."
by Doug Zellmer
Oshkosh Northwestern

*********************************************

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Vostok-ice-core-petit.png
Over 400,000 years of "climate change" from the Vostok Ice Core Samples

As the cycle continues it is global COOLING that is really our "enemy".
*********************************************

The Sun Also Sets
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175
Climate Change: Not every scientist is part of Al Gore's mythical "consensus." Scientists worried about a new ice age seek funding to better observe something bigger than your SUV — the sun.

Back in 1991, before Al Gore first shouted that the Earth was in the balance, the Danish Meteorological Institute released a study using data that went back centuries that showed that global temperatures closely tracked solar cycles.

To many, those data were convincing. Now, Canadian scientists are seeking additional funding for more and better "eyes" with which to observe our sun, which has a bigger impact on Earth's climate than all the tailpipes and smokestacks on our planet combined.

And they're worried about global cooling, not warming.

Kenneth Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada's National Research Council, is among those looking at the sun for evidence of an increase in sunspot activity.

Solar activity fluctuates in an 11-year cycle. But so far in this cycle, the sun has been disturbingly quiet. The lack of increased activity could signal the beginning of what is known as a Maunder Minimum, an event which occurs every couple of centuries and can last as long as a century.

Such an event occurred in the 17th century. The observation of sunspots showed extraordinarily low levels of magnetism on the sun, with little or no 11-year cycle.

This solar hibernation corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. Frigid winters and cold summers during that period led to massive crop failures, famine and death in Northern Europe.

Tapping reports no change in the sun's magnetic field so far this cycle and warns that if the sun remains quiet for another year or two, it may indicate a repeat of that period of drastic cooling of the Earth, bringing massive snowfall and severe weather to the Northern Hemisphere.

Tapping oversees the operation of a 60-year-old radio telescope that he calls a "stethoscope for the sun." But he and his colleagues need better equipment.

In Canada, where radio-telescopic monitoring of the sun has been conducted since the end of World War II, a new instrument, the next-generation solar flux monitor, could measure the sun's emissions more rapidly and accurately.

As we have noted many times, perhaps the biggest impact on the Earth's climate over time has been the sun.

For instance, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Solar Research in Germany report the sun has been burning more brightly over the last 60 years, accounting for the 1 degree Celsius increase in Earth's temperature over the last 100 years.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales."

Rather, he says, "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

Patterson, sharing Tapping's concern, says: "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth."

"Solar activity has overpowered any effect that CO2 has had before, and it most likely will again," Patterson says. "If we were to have even a medium-sized solar minimum, we could be looking at a lot more bad effects than 'global warming' would have had."

In 2005, Russian astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov made some waves — and not a few enemies in the global warming "community" — by predicting that the sun would reach a peak of activity about three years from now, to be accompanied by "dramatic changes" in temperatures.

A Hoover Institution Study a few years back examined historical data and came to a similar conclusion.

"The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were one in 100," according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

The study says that "try as we might, we simply could not find any relationship between industrial activity, energy consumption and changes in global temperatures."

The study concludes that if you shut down all the world's power plants and factories, "there would not be much effect on temperatures."

But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance.

*****************************************

So Al Gore, Barry ObaMARX and the rest of the Watermelons out there can take their ideas about TAXING us (and other stupid, damaging ideas) by "fixing" "Global Warming" and stuff it.

[GAR]

Fuck Al Gore and FUCK SALT!

[DEMON CUNT]

http://www.forparentsbyparents.com/images/baby_content/toilet_training/toilet_training.jpg

Mods: Please move this topic to the child's forum immediately!

[GAR]

Al Gore and his Global Warming trendifriends have all declared war on us in the name of that fantasy molecule Carbon of which 95% of the planet's mass is made up of yet has only been proven to exist when Gore gives his speeches.

Now it looks like he'll have to reverse his trend and go "global cooling is caused by carbon in the atmosphere created by industry and small businesses."

[DEMON CUNT]

You guys win. Global warming is a total farce.

Next subject.

[Andy Taylor]

When Al Gore promotes something you know somethings fishy. Yeah, like he's become anti-establishment all of a sudden. It's all about the carbon tax opportunities.

[hideyoursheep]

When Al Gore or anyone else mentions 'global warming', I'm almost certain they're referring to an area bigger than your driveway.

[LoungeMachine]

When Al Gore promotes something you know somethings fishy. Yeah, like he's become anti-establishment all of a sudden. It's all about the carbon tax opportunities.

All of a sudden?

He's been outspoken on this subject for 30 years. :rolleyes:

[bueno bob]

LMAO

Yeah, global warming is just a big 'ole conspiracy to fool ya. Not that, you know, fooling you about it would serve ANY CAUSE AT ALL. But yeah, all those crazy scientists and global ecologists are just lying because it sounds cool.

Makes perfect sense, don't ya just know it?

[Seshmeister]

It's called Climate Change not Global Warming for a reason.

[Andy Taylor]

All of a sudden?

He's been outspoken on this subject for 30 years. :rolleyes:


Ok, I got that wrong. Maybe he's serious, I don't know.


Bueno Bob: More than a thousand scientists have come out against the global warming theory.

[Seshmeister]

Name them. :)

The very few scientists that do come out against it are nearly always not climatologists so it's not their field.

They are also often American and in the employ of big business.

[Nickdfresh]

Name them. :)

The very few scientists that do come out against it are nearly always not climatologists so it's not their field.

They are also often American and in the employ of big business.


And even the ones that do come out against it are usually not denying that humans drastically changing the environment. Their only issues are usually the scale of the problem and what we can feasibly do about it...

But I guess global warming is such a hoax that the US EPA went out of their way to contradict the findings of their own scientists...

[LoungeMachine]

Name them. :)

The very few scientists that do come out against it are nearly always not climatologists so it's not their field.

They are also often American and in the employ of big business.

Much like the "scientists" who claim no connection between smoking and lung cancer get their funding from Big Tobacco.

:smoke2::uck:

[Nickdfresh]

Al Gore and his Global Warming trendifriends have all declared war on us in the name of that fantasy molecule Carbon of which 95% of the planet's mass is made up of yet has only been proven to exist when Gore gives his speeches.

Now it looks like he'll have to reverse his trend and go "global cooling is caused by carbon in the atmosphere created by industry and small businesses."

Ladies and gentlemen, the prototypical uneducated fucktard that fell for the farcical, short-lived "carbon is our friend" campaign financed by the oil and gas industries...

Yes, we need carbon just like we need fire. But when you light your fucking house on fire, generally this is a problem...

[Guitar Shark]

But wait.... these scientists and environmentalists have an AGENDA!! Therefore, you must reject their opinions.

Thankfully, the people who deny the existence of climate change do not have an agenda. None whatsoever.

[FORD]

Much like the "scientists" who claim no connection between smoking and lung cancer get their funding from Big Tobacco.

:smoke2::uck:

Or the Monsanto scientists who are suddenly rushing out all the "studies" that "prove" high fructose corn poison is "just as safe" as sugar, and has nothing at all to do with the obesity and diabetes epidemics in the US that just accidentally have escalated since HFCP was introduced into the US food supply.

Some so called "scientists" will say whatever they're paid to say.

[bueno bob]

Bueno Bob: More than a thousand scientists have come out against the global warming theory.

Which, obviously, dismisses the many thousands more who all come up with the same evidence, evidence that a reasonably bright 3rd grader can understand and say "Oh yeah - global warming", right?

You take it on faith that it's all a bunch of hogwash and I'll do something to improve the world's health for your kids, then.

[Seshmeister]

Much like the "scientists" who claim no connection between smoking and lung cancer get their funding from Big Tobacco.

:smoke2::uck:

Another one was lead in petrol.

The fuckers hired scientists for years trying to deny it did you any harm.

Fortunately an American scientific hero called Claire Patterson fought them for years and years and won in the end.

He(yes he) was also the first guy to finally work out the correct age of the Earth, bit of an unsung hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clair_Cameron_Patterson

Even so our kids still have 620 times more lead in their bodies than if they had been born before the twats put lead in gasoline to stop engine knocking. The same twats still sell lead additives to 3rd world countries where they aren't banned yet which of course ends up in everyones atmosphere eventually- I hope they all get cancer.

[Andy Taylor]

Which, obviously, dismisses the many thousands more who all come up with the same evidence, evidence that a reasonably bright 3rd grader can understand and say "Oh yeah - global warming", right?

You take it on faith that it's all a bunch of hogwash and I'll do something to improve the world's health for your kids, then.

erm... it's understood that we were disagreeing about warming as caused by humans wasn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

This could be false, but there were supposed to be studies showing that othe planets were heating up as well.

[Seshmeister]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/oil-giant-comes-in-from-the-cold-1297558.html

Oil giant comes in from the cold

Exxon funded global warming denial for years. Yesterday, in an astonishing U-turn, it called for the imposition of green taxes.

By Stephen Foley in New York
Saturday, 10 January 2009



The boss of ExxonMobil, the world's largest oil company, has called for a carbon tax to tackle global warming, marking a volte-face by the firm once described by Greenpeace as Climate Criminal No 1. Assailed from all sides by scientists and a new cadre of US politicians, led by the President-elect, Barack Obama, the landmark concession by Rex Tillerson represents a nod to realpolitik after years when the company denied the existence of man-made global warming.

Exxon had already dropped its funding of lobby groups which deny the science of climate change and begun to take a softer public line, but even Mr Tillerson admitted that propounding a carbon tax had stuck in the craw until recently. However, with European-style "cap and trade" rules governing carbon emissions moving up the agenda in the US, a carbon tax may be the least worst option, he said. Environmental groups gave a sceptical response to Exxon's U-turn, calling it a deliberate attempt to torpedo the movement for outright carbon caps and any early switch to alternative energy. "A carbon tax is also the most efficient means of reflecting the cost of carbon in all economic decisions – from investments made by companies to fuel their requirements, to the product choices made by consumers," Mr Tillerson said in a speech to the Woodrow Wilson Centre for International Scholars, a Washington think-tank. "As a businessman it is hard to speak favourably about any new tax. But a carbon tax strikes me as a more direct, a more transparent and a more effective approach."

The chief executive's comments are aimed at moving ExxonMobil decisively to the centre of the political debate about global warming in a year that will see world leaders meet in Copenhagen to establish a successor to the Kyoto treaty on climate change – something that threatens to fatally weaken the long-term prospects for oil companies who are refusing to invest in alternative energy, such as Exxon.

Last year, Exxon came under pressure from descendants of the oil magnate John D Rockefeller, who said it would go the way of the dinosaur unless it shifted positions on climate change. Use of its oil and gas output is estimated to dump 500 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year.

A "cap and trade" system sets limits on carbon output and allows polluters to buy permits from companies which reduce their own emissions. The nascent system established in Europe was failing to lead to the reductions its proponents expected, Mr Tillerson said, and its extension into the US would create "a new Wall Street" of brokers and speculators who would make long-term planning impossible.

By backing a carbon tax, the Exxon chairman has put himself in the unusual company of the former US vice-president Al Gore and Mr Obama's designated head of the National Economic Council, Larry Summers.

But Greenpeace – which has waged a multi-decade war against Exxon, its denial of man-made climate change and its secret funding of renegade scientists – warned Mr Tillerson's intervention was a smokescreen for its attempt to slow down the switch to alternative fuels. "A carbon tax is a political poison pill," said Kert Davies, a research director at Greenpeace. "No politician in the US would propose something with the word tax in it. Being in favour of something makes Exxon look like it is being intellectual, but this threatens to derail the prevailing international discussion."

Exxon argues that raising the cost of carbon-emitting fuels could change consumer behaviour and spur the entrepreneurship needed to boost solar, wind and other alternative power sources, but that these alternatives are not now sufficiently technologically advanced to meet the ambitious targets demanded of them. Separately, this week Mr Tillerson dismissed Mr Obama's proposed targets for alternative energy use, saying "let's not kid ourselves".

Under the previous chairman, Lee Raymond, Exxon took a belligerent approach to environmental protest, dismissing man-made climate change as a fantasy, and his $400m (£264m) retirement package in 2006 aroused major controversy. Greenpeace called him the Darth Vader of climate change.

Since his appointment, Mr Tillerson has largely sought to strike a more amenable public relations stance, stressing the work that Exxon has done to reduce emissions from its own operations and the new technologies it is selling to help businesses use fuel more efficiently.

Yesterday, Greenpeace challenged ExxonMobil to come up with a detailed proposal for a carbon tax high enough to significantly reduce demand for its products.

[Seshmeister]

erm... it's understood that we were disagreeing about warming as caused by humans wasn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

This could be false, but there were supposed to be studies showing that othe planets were heating up as well.

But that's a list of about 20 not 1000, almost none of whom work in the field and the majority are saying that there is some effect just not all.

[Seshmeister]

Also I see that the original 'article' was just an editorial from a right wing investors magazine.

Their latest editorial is complaining about the torture camp at Gitmo being closed...

[GAR]

But wait.... these scientists and environmentalists have an AGENDA!! Therefore, you must reject their opinions.

Guitar Shark is correct: PhD's are issued based on whitepapers, formulated off research data and if they don't write papers, they're unpublished therefore not earining their keep.

Global warming is a theory best destroyed by the recent cold snap, and Mt. St. Helen's eruption - if Yosemite erupts blowing lots of carbon in the air, you'll see a real cold snap worldwide that hasn't been seen since the 1700's!

I could publish papers saying the sky has fallen.. does that mean it will fall?

NO but what it will mean is I've done my job as an undergrad trying to earn that PhD. Which if I have one, nabs my literary agent a bigger publishing advance when I go write a book.

(Lounge quit owning yerself.)

[GAR]

The same twats still sell lead additives to 3rd world countries where they aren't banned yet which of course ends up in everyones atmosphere eventually- I hope they all get cancer.

Let's not get Sesh started on Fluoride poisoning added to the municipal water systems at 5 times the publicly accepted levels serving as a dentrifice.. because it's probably the same Twats doing that as the fuel lead.

[Seshmeister]

I could publish papers saying the sky has fallen..


No you couldn't.

[Seshmeister]

Let's not get Sesh started on Fluoride poisoning added to the municipal water systems at 5 times the publicly accepted levels serving as a dentrifice.. because it's probably the same Twats doing that as the fuel lead.

It's the opposite.

Fluoride additives have been scientifically studied and set at safe levels.

Lead in gas was scientifically studied and found not to be safe.

This isn't exactly rocket surgery... :)

[Seshmeister]

...it's probably the same Twats doing that as the fuel lead.

No absolutely not.

The lead additive people are the US company called the Ethyl Corporation based in VA.

Early on they decided that calling it lead was maybe bad marketing so came up with the name Ethyl.

They are a complete cunt of a company who over the years that have caused the deaths of thousands including many of their own employees and are basically the scum of the corporate earth.

I know you love a good cut and paste over knowing stuff so here's a great reference site for all of this.

http://www.runet.edu/~wkovarik/ethylwar/


Cheers!

:gulp:

[LoungeMachine]

No you couldn't.

Beat me to it.

:gulp:

[Nickdfresh]

Guitar Shark is correct: PhD's are issued based on whitepapers, formulated off research data and if they don't write papers, they're unpublished therefore not earining their keep.

Global warming is a theory best destroyed by the recent cold snap, and Mt. St. Helen's eruption - if Yosemite erupts blowing lots of carbon in the air, you'll see a real cold snap worldwide that hasn't been seen since the 1700's!

I could publish papers saying the sky has fallen.. does that mean it will fall?

NO but what it will mean is I've done my job as an undergrad trying to earn that PhD. Which if I have one, nabs my literary agent a bigger publishing advance when I go write a book.

(Lounge quit owning yerself.)

But what if a Mexican steals your job and writes it first?

[LoungeMachine]

:lol:

Had he said he could write a paper on the KKK and have it published, I would have believed him...

[GAR]

I know you love a good cut and paste over knowing stuff so here's a great reference site for all of this.

http://www.runet.edu/~wkovarik/ethylwar/



j/k you know that and yes I do - thanx for the reference!

[GAR]

But what if a Mexican steals your job and writes it first?

Various counties in Los Angeles report varying illegal Hispanic children's dropout rates as high as 60% and literacy levels (in English need I say it) in downtown districts as low as 22% based on test scores.

If Mexicans were half as literate I'd have something to worry about, Nick.

[Nickdfresh]

Various counties in Los Angeles report varying illegal Hispanic children's dropout rates as high as 60% and literacy levels (in English need I say it) in downtown districts as low as 22% based on test scores.

If Mexicans were half as literate I'd have something to worry about, Nick.

If you were twice as literate, we'd all have less to worry about....

[Andy Taylor]

But that's a list of about 20 not 1000, almost none of whom work in the field and the majority are saying that there is some effect just not all.



http://www.petitionproject.org/ About 30,000.



On the wiki page, most of them are of the opinion that it isn't manmade primarily or that the cause is unknown. I don't know about any of those fields; do you know enough about those fields to say exactly what one's qualifications should be to make accurate observations on this?


Which original article are you talking about?

[LoungeMachine]

http://www.petitionproject.org/ About 30,000.



On the wiki page, most of them are of the opinion that it isn't manmade primarily or that the cause is unknown. I don't know about any of those fields; do you know enough about those fields to say exactly what one's qualifications should be to make accurate observations on this?


Which original article are you talking about?

Make that 30,001

I just signed as Dr. Gonzo


And they verify these credentials how exactly?

:gulp:

[Andy Taylor]

Dunno. :)


Maybe your sig will be taken down later.

[Seshmeister]

http://www.petitionproject.org/ About 30,000.



On the wiki page, most of them are of the opinion that it isn't manmade primarily or that the cause is unknown. I don't know about any of those fields; do you know enough about those fields to say exactly what one's qualifications should be to make accurate observations on this?


Which original article are you talking about?



Come on what did you Google to get that site? :)

First up the petition was mainly 10 years ago, they don't check the qualifications and it was initially done via a mass mailing with a fraudulent paper.

Science is all about peer reviewed papers. You need to publish findings, people who are qualified check their validity and we move forward.

It's called the 'Scientific Method' and it fucking works.

It's how you can send a message from Scotland all the way to the DLRArmy server in the US and then it travels back to Scotland so I can read it.

This petition was a con. They sent it out in a mass mailing with a fake unpublished paper making unsubstantiated claims to get people to sign.

Plus as Lounge just showed they don't check qualifications in any case.

http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/atmosphere-energy/climate-change/ten-myths.html#cc2



The petition is a hoax. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists of the USA:

In the spring of 1998, mailboxes of US scientists flooded with packet from the "Global Warming Petition Project," including a reprint of a Wall Street Journal op-ed "Science has spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth," a copy of a faux scientific article claiming that "increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have no deleterious effects upon global climate," a short letter signed by past-president National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Frederick Seitz, and a short petition calling for the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol on the grounds that a reduction in carbon dioxide "would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."

The sponsor, little-known Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, tried to beguile unsuspecting scientists into believing that this packet had originated from the National Academy of the Sciences, both by referencing Seitz's past involvement with the NAS and with an article formatted to look as if it was a published article in the Academy's Proceedings, which it was not.

The NAS quickly distanced itself from the petition project, issuing a statement saying, "the petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of the Academy."

The petition project was a deliberate attempt to mislead scientists and to rally them in an attempt to undermine support for the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was not based on a review of the science of global climate change, nor were its signers experts in the field of climate science. In fact, the only criterion for signing the petition was a bachelor's degree in science. The petition resurfaced in early 2001 in a renewed attempt to undermine international climate treaty negotiations.


In fact, American experts agree with the IPCC on its fundamental assertions:

In the summer of 2001, George W. Bush asked for the assistance of the US National Academy of Sciences "in identifying the areas in the science of climate change where there are the greatest certainties and uncertainties," and for its "views on whether there are any substantive differences between the IPCC Reports and the IPCC summaries." The NAS was given only a month to respond but did so nonetheless:

Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions

Despite the fact that the committee producing this report includes a notable skeptic who allegedly colludes with industry* (Dr. Richard Lindzen of M.I.T.), the NAS report states:

"The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue. … Despite the uncertainties, there is general agreement that the observed warming is real and particularly strong within the past 20 years" (p.3).

For further publications of the NAS see:

Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises (2002)

Under the Weather: Climate, Ecosystems, and Infectious Disease (2001)


The reader is invited to visit the Union of Concerned Scientists' website for an excellent summary of the skeptic organizations, their tactics, and other hoaxes such as the so-called Leipzig Declaration.

* Lindzen calls himself an "independent scientist" and consults for the fossil fuel industry at a rate of US $2500 a day (Sharon Beder, Corporate Hijacking of the Greenhouse Debate, The Ecologist, March/April 1999, pp. 119-122.)

[Seshmeister]

Hahaha it gets better.

Ladies and Gentleman may I introduce the august and esteemed body that set up and 'validates' this petition - 'The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine'.

http://www.independentscientist.com/

Can anyone else hear banjos? :D

[Andy Taylor]

Hmm... interesting.

Since I'm lazy... Are you sure there's no other petition, one where scientists are against global warming?

Yes, I'm asking you to debate on my side of the argument. ;)

[Dr. Love]

I could publish papers saying the sky has fallen.. does that mean it will fall?


Don't be foolish, of course not.












The sky would have already fallen by that point.

[GAR]

Andy, the story on Lounge's signature goes back to late 2001 and the site went down when we were "dlrarmy.com"

All we had at that point before the site sat back up in its' highchair was a 300-character message page which the mystery poster known only by the alias "Joe Thunder" made the phenomenally-blasphemous statement noted in the LM's sig.

It is Army legend, and if Lounge ditched it somebody else would pick it up and add it since at the time it was that funny. If Joe Thunder shows up, you'll understand why everyone attacks him!

[GAR]

The sky would have already fallen by that point.

Well if you believe the biblical perspective on 800-yearlong lifetimes and a reference to a "firmament that covered the earth" made of water, which when it fell created the oceans and the flood of Noah's time and would have served a fantastic UV shield while allowing the sunlight to pass, then it's absolutely already fallen.

So you're correct actually.. I did use a loaded euphemism you so smart.

[Seshmeister]

Hmm... interesting.

Since I'm lazy... Are you sure there's no other petition, one where scientists are against global warming?


There may be but its self defeating because any decent scientist wouldn't rely on petitions - he would go out and use the scientific method instead.

1. Define the question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form hypothesis
4. Perform experiment and collect data
5. Analyze data
6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
7. Publish results
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)

It would only take one scientist to do this and if he came up with a robust enough i.e. correct hypothesis then they could blow the whole Climate Change thing out of the water - that's the power of science.

I blame a lot of this on religion, new age crap and people being generally too respectful of stupid shit.

There seems to be some sort of prevailing idea that all beliefs are equal, they are absofuckinglutely not.

This dumb idea that you or I can turn around and dismiss something like climate change or validate homeopathy just by saying 'I believe...' and it has equal weight to science is complete BS and getting the human race nowhere.

Cheers!

:gulp:

[Andy Taylor]

Andy, the story on Lounge's signature goes back to late 2001 and the site went down when we were "dlrarmy.com"

All we had at that point before the site sat back up in its' highchair was a 300-character message page which the mystery poster known only by the alias "Joe Thunder" made the phenomenally-blasphemous statement noted in the LM's sig.

It is Army legend, and if Lounge ditched it somebody else would pick it up and add it since at the time it was that funny. If Joe Thunder shows up, you'll understand why everyone attacks him!


Funny for sure. Maybe I'm being thick but how does that story fit in here?


I first posted here briefly in 2001 as John Silver or Long John Silver, I found it to be a most entertaining site.

[Andy Taylor]

There may be but its self defeating because any decent scientist wouldn't rely on petitions - he would go out and use the scientific method instead.

1. Define the question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form hypothesis
4. Perform experiment and collect data
5. Analyze data
6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
7. Publish results
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)

It would only take one scientist to do this and if he came up with a robust enough i.e. correct hypothesis then they could blow the whole Climate Change thing out of the water - that's the power of science.

I blame a lot of this on religion, new age crap and people being generally too respectful of stupid shit.

There seems to be some sort of prevailing idea that all beliefs are equal, they are absofuckinglutely not.

This dumb idea that you or I can turn around and dismiss something like climate change or validate homeopathy just by saying 'I believe...' and it has equal weight to science is complete BS and getting the human race nowhere.

Cheers!

:gulp:


Yes, I know that. I wasn't saying I believe or what not. But there are already scientists who argue against popular GW theories, one of these days when I have the energy I might look. I don't put too much faith in the power of science because ... scientists are people and their theories are not infallible. So whatever that theory was of Einstein that was proved wrong, well it shows that we can't be too confident of what science tells at this point.

[bueno bob]

Ladies and Gentleman may I introduce the august and esteemed body that set up and 'validates' this petition - 'The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine'.

Can anyone else hear banjos? :D

SHUT UP! :mad:

[Andy Taylor]

Btw, Sesh I didn't mean to thank you for that post, I just slipped. :)

[LoungeMachine]

Andy, the story on Lounge's signature goes back to late 2001 and the site went down when we were "dlrarmy.com"

All we had at that point before the site sat back up in its' highchair was a 300-character message page which the mystery poster known only by the alias "Joe Thunder" made the phenomenally-blasphemous statement noted in the LM's sig.

It is Army legend, and if Lounge ditched it somebody else would pick it up and add it since at the time it was that funny. If Joe Thunder shows up, you'll understand why everyone attacks him!



You use WE alot when speaking of the Army.

You mean when YOU gave out your password to the Mod Room?



The "sig" Andy refered to was my signature on the petition, moron.

:gulp:

idiot.

[Nickdfresh]

There may be but its self defeating because any decent scientist wouldn't rely on petitions - he would go out and use the scientific method instead.
...
:gulp:


Exactly, these petitions are about everything BUT science. They're about making the issue a debate in public opinion...

This is also done in regards to the Creationism vs. Evolution thing...

[GAR]

Funny for sure. Maybe I'm being thick but how does that story fit in here?

When you add a signature quotation under your "User CP" control panel, it appends every post in every thread you go to. So think of a good really good one otherwise, like Lounge's sig, it's appears as an inside joke.

Inside joke or not, for those who remember the moment it was probably one of the most hilarious posts ever made - even though the board wasnt fully functioning at the time.

[GAR]

You use WE alot when speaking of the Army.

My recall says you came online years after I've been here using my little We.

[scamper]

Was "Global Warming" is now "Global Climate Change". Is it happening? Hell yeah! Do we have an effect on it? Hell yeah! Can we stop it? Hell no! We can lower our impact but it will still happen it always has and it always will. Lets tread lightly and do what we can. That being said "Fuck a carbon tax and any other way people try to make money off of it".

[Seshmeister]

Was "Global Warming" is now "Global Climate Change". Is it happening? Hell yeah! Do we have an effect on it? Hell yeah! Can we stop it? Hell no! We can lower our impact but it will still happen it always has and it always will. Lets tread lightly and do what we can. That being said "Fuck a carbon tax and any other way people try to make money off of it".

I agree. Technology and market forces is the only way out of this and that may not work either. On a plus side as long as nothing fucks up the gulf stream the chances are in 50 years time my grandkids will work part time in on a machine gun guard tower shooting at people from the 90% of the world trying to escape from their deserts to a Scotland that finally has a perfect climate. :D

I was just taking issue with the anti-science nonsense.

[hideyoursheep]

I've been here using my little We.

So small it only gets 1 syllable?

:cato:

[Big Train]

What's so wrong with saying nobody knows for sure? All of the science seems to indicate that nobody, no matter how "convinced" they are, knows for sure one way or another.

Penn and Teller did a fantastic episode on it, comparing carbon credits to "indulgence taxes" of the Catholic church. Of which Gore owns a company to sell to you, which was in operation two years before his movie. Also, from which he buys HIS OWN carbon credits. Smells odd, you got to admit.

I know it's a tired line, but why exactly does Gore use so much juice? For a guy who has literally stated the world is coming to an end in 120 months (or ten years, whatever you prefer), he sure doesn't seem concerned. It's like the pope riding in the bullet proof pope mobile...sends mixed signals at best.

I don't believe in climate change. When the science is solid, not computer models which change wildly variables entered change (the source of most dissention), then I'd be willing to agree.

That said, I do believe in taking measures for alternative energy and air quality. That science and economics is solid. FOR THOSE REASONS, we should be building better vehicles, alternative power and reducing emissions for air and water. I would do it for the jobs alone for this country.

[Nickdfresh]

I agree. Technology and market forces is the only way out of this and that may not work either. On a plus side as long as nothing fucks up the gulf stream the chances are in 50 years time my grandkids will work part time in on a machine gun guard tower shooting at people from the 90% of the world trying to escape from their deserts to a Scotland that finally has a perfect climate. :D

I was just taking issue with the anti-science nonsense.


There's a lot of economic opportunity in the green energy industry as well. Buffalo now has a bunch of wind turbines going up both in the city and on the rural cow-poke outskirts...

[Ally_Kat]

I'm with Big Train on this one. It's a theory and now all of a sudden I'm told to feel guilty about how I'm personally killing the Earth.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not running out spraying Aquanet by the case or excessively revving my engine in protest (altho I would like my old inhaler back, thank you very much. Environmentally friendly, yes. My lung friendly, no). I deffy think we should look around and see how we're doing things, ways we can improve, and ways that have not worked. However, I don't think anything we do for the planet or ourselves will be significant enough until China jumps on the bandwagon.

And I'm loving the snow. We haven't had in the last few years. That's one climate change I'll take! Blizzard please :)

[Satan]

I'm all for global warming. It's getting crowded down here in Hell, so once Earth reaches an average temperature of 666 degrees, I'll just call it "the suburbs". http://www.cosgan.de/images/smilie/teufel/d010.gif

[Diamondjimi]

I've got a foot of snow on my driveway ,and my snowblower is on the fritz...

Fuck, I'm PISSED!!!

[lesfunk]

It reminds me of something Willie Nelson said when One of his wives caught him in bed with another woman.
He said " Darlin, what are you going to believe, what you see or what I tell you?"

[hideyoursheep]

I've got a foot of snow on my driveway.


Never get high off your own supply!

:smoke:

[Seshmeister]

There's a lot of economic opportunity in the green energy industry as well. Buffalo now has a bunch of wind turbines going up both in the city and on the rural cow-poke outskirts...

I've noticed a fair amount of hot air comes out of Buffalo... ;)

[Nickdfresh]

I've noticed a fair amount of hot air comes out of Buffalo... ;)

Keeps us warm in this fucking cold.

[Sgt Schultz]

31,072 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,021 with PhDs
http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg

http://www.petitionproject.org/index.html