Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:57:38 -0400: Hi, [snip] >Saving large predators which are known to >prey on humans, just because they *should* be saved, is just one small >example of such behavior. [snip] The degree to which this occurs is inversely proportional to the distance between the predator and the human. We have no problem saving tigers in India, or Lions in Africa, unless we happen to live in India or Africa ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Taylor J. Smith wrote: > > Hi All, > > Regardless of whether or not one believes in original sin, > it must be admitted that something is seriously wrong with > homo sapiens. No, it mustn't. Humans mess up a lot, it's true, but they try a lot, too. When the last polar bear is gone from the arctic, what species will mourn? Homo sapiens, and that's all. Trivial example, large concept. Humans evolved in a world in which "everybody", as perceived by any one person, was perhaps a few dozen individuals. Our innate knack for politics also evolved in that world. Yet despite the small size of the slate we were designed on, we've gone on to produce institutions which work (more or less) on a planet wide basis. We wrestle, all of us, with instincts which were evolved in a world where eating more calories was almost always good, where reproducing was vital and more children was nearly always better, where land was infinite and nurturing the land was unnecessary, where large predators were the Enemy and compassion for other species was silly and/or self destructive. Yet, many of us regularly rise above the instincts that evolution left us with, and act in ways which seem so utterly selfless that they might totally amaze members of any other species, if they could understand what we do. Saving large predators which are known to prey on humans, just because they *should* be saved, is just one small example of such behavior. Altruistic behavior is, frankly, common as dirt among humans. Charities would not exist without such behavior. Not only does such behavior always extend beyond the family group, or even the race group, it often, as I already pointed out, extends across species boundaries. When a sparrow falls in the woods, who cares? There's only one species I know of with members who might pick up a fallen sparrow and try to nurse it back to health: Humans. (Contrast *that* with the documented behavior of the Old Testament "god" who killed Job's wife and children and inflicted him with boils just to prove a point in a stupid argument.) Things are not going well right now in a number of ways, and we may or may not find a way out of our current problems. None the less I would hesitate a long time before I issued a blanket condemnation of humankind. Errors, accidents, and failure are not automatic proof of either malicious intent or any intrinsic lack of worth.
[Vo]:I told you it was cold
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote on 3-13-09: ``Conspiracy theories all have one interesting feature in common: They cannot be disproved. Like creationism, they're intrinsically not falsifiable. This, alone, doesn't prove such theories wrong, of course. (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're *not* out to get you!)'' Hi All, Regardless of whether or not one believes in original sin, it must be admitted that something is seriously wrong with homo sapiens. That such a creature should have atomic weapons is a cosmic joke, with the punch line to be delivered when the Big Chimps finally lead us to oblivion. Given man's "fallen nature", conspiracy is probably the norm of human behavior, hence the constant plaintive calling for transparency. There actually could be a Science of Conspiracy because of the well-documented conspiracies available for study. In fact, Conspiracy Science 101 should probably consist of case studies. Naturally, with any conspiracy, many of the important details will never be known, since secrecy and disinformation are the essence of conspiracy. (See Russ Baker's "Family of Secrets.") Of current interest are market conspiracies: the bull market "pump and dump," playing on greed; and the bear market "bear raid," playing on fear. The kleptocrats of 2001 - 2008 have engaged in both types of conspiracies, with the first part of this period dominated by shearing the sheep with "irrational exuberance." and the last part culminating in the Great Bear Raid of 2008. (The fall of the Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) from 14,164 on October 9, 2007, to 6,547 on 3-9-09 was not some inexplicable act of G_d.) Perhaps the best known bear raid is Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929. See http://articles.wallstraits.net/articles/1287 -- A bankers pool had previously been organized to support stock prices. ``Thomas Lamont ... was forced to deny rumors that the bankers had actually been selling stocks (conducting a bear raid) rather than buying ... (It would later be revealed that Albert Wiggins, the chairman of Chase National Bank and a member of the pool, was personally short several million dollars' worth of stock at the time the bankers sought to organize support for stock prices.) ...'' After the bear raid of 1937, Joseph Kennedy, in 1938, first chairman of the Securities Exchange Commission, formed under the administration of F. D. Roosevelt, had the SEC adopt the uptick rule, more formally known as rule 10a-1, which (loosely) said that you could only short a stock following an uptick in its price. The SEC eliminated the uptick rule on July 6, 2007; and there was nothing to stop the bears piling on as they made fortunes driving down the market. Jack Smith
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:46:59 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] >The Sun has an eleven year cycle. We're now at the bottom, Solar >Quiesence. Having this coincide with a very cold winter fits with the >solar driven model. Ditto for Horner's contention that global >temperature has been decreasing for the past eight years. [snip] Correct, however the Solar cycle is probably not the only influence. AGW probably plays a significant role as well. IOW you need to compare a whole series of solar minima, to see if there is a rising trend. (The Solar cycle can be expected to superimpose a sine wave on the trend.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
OrionWorks wrote: Thomas sez: According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for March 12 this morning in Embarass. Haven't you also agreed with the assessment that there is a warming trend occurring? Isn't the argument about who or what is causing the prolonged warming trend? The Sun has an eleven year cycle. We're now at the bottom, Solar Quiesence. Having this coincide with a very cold winter fits with the solar driven model. Ditto for Horner's contention that global temperature has been decreasing for the past eight years. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Absolutely. I find it best to shop local produce, and theres a big difference between green farms and "organic" ones sometimes. There are a lot of alternative labeling systems in place, hopefully a few with a methodology that makes more sense than the organic label become more mainstream. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > leaking pen wrote: >> Umm, my name isnt steven > > Ahh, there are so many stevens, stephens, steves, and whatnot in this > group that nobody can keep them straight anymore, and I'm not surprised > that thomas gets confused and thinks everything's coming from some > steph/ven or other > > I even sometimes find myself paging back to the top of a post from some > "Stephen" or other to check the "from:" field and find out whether or > not I'm the one who wrote it. > > BTW I appreciated the collection of homonymal errors; tx. > > And the info on organic pesticides, ditto (tho for different reasons -- > it wasn't exactly amusing). I've gotta do a little more research on > that one; we eat a lot of green organic stuff here, so if some of the > "green" on the leaves is from, say, "Paris", we really want to know. > >
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
leaking pen wrote: > Umm, my name isnt steven Ahh, there are so many stevens, stephens, steves, and whatnot in this group that nobody can keep them straight anymore, and I'm not surprised that thomas gets confused and thinks everything's coming from some steph/ven or other I even sometimes find myself paging back to the top of a post from some "Stephen" or other to check the "from:" field and find out whether or not I'm the one who wrote it. BTW I appreciated the collection of homonymal errors; tx. And the info on organic pesticides, ditto (tho for different reasons -- it wasn't exactly amusing). I've gotta do a little more research on that one; we eat a lot of green organic stuff here, so if some of the "green" on the leaves is from, say, "Paris", we really want to know.
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Umm, my name isnt steven On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 5:30 PM, thomas malloy wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> thomas malloy wrote: >> Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. >>> >>> That's why they call it Climate Change, it covers them either way. >> >> It only covers them if the climate is, in fact, changing. It has to change >> in either direction, or in both directions in different seasons. If the >> average for winter is no colder than it was 50 or 100 years ago, and summer >> is no warmer, that means they are wrong. The test they face is just as >> rigorous and easy to verify as it would be if the change is only in one >> direction, so they are not "covered" in any sense. >> > That was brilliant Jed. I laughed more at it, than I did at Steven's silly > poem. > >> >>> According to Christopher Horner, the AGW advocates have doctored the data >>> to support the warning hypothesis, you OTOH, contend that the warming effect >>> is real . . . >> >> Naturally I am assuming that they did not doctor the data. If they did, >> then the effect is not real. > > How open minded of you Jed. I may just have to procure a copy of Horner's > book just to ascertain the veracity of his claims. > >> >> However, as I said before, I think it is extremely unlikely that they >> doctored the data and yet none of the conspirators has revealed that fact. > > But it has been revealed, Horner's book is but one,of several which make the > aforementioned claim. > >> Tens of thousands of people would have to be in on the conspiracy and I >> think it is impossible for so many people to keep a secret. > > If the Horner, et al, are correct, there are a few well placed people > beating the drum, and a lot of other people cowered into silence. > >> From what I know of human nature I suppose the likelihood of this is zero >> to 8 or 10 decimal places. I am surprised that you or anyone else takes this >> hypothesis seriously. > > IMHO, the truth is right in front of you. > >> >> If there were only a few dozen people involved in the conspiracy, then it >> would be plausible that the data has been diddled with. > > Unless we're right of course, and it's a conspiracy of tens of thousands, > done in plain sight. > > See my next post > > > --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html --- > >
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Thomas sez: ... > But it has been revealed, ... Granted, I'm probably taking the phrase out of context. Priceless, nevertheless. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Jed Rothwell wrote: thomas malloy wrote: Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. That's why they call it Climate Change, it covers them either way. It only covers them if the climate is, in fact, changing. It has to change in either direction, or in both directions in different seasons. If the average for winter is no colder than it was 50 or 100 years ago, and summer is no warmer, that means they are wrong. The test they face is just as rigorous and easy to verify as it would be if the change is only in one direction, so they are not "covered" in any sense. That was brilliant Jed. I laughed more at it, than I did at Steven's silly poem. According to Christopher Horner, the AGW advocates have doctored the data to support the warning hypothesis, you OTOH, contend that the warming effect is real . . . Naturally I am assuming that they did not doctor the data. If they did, then the effect is not real. How open minded of you Jed. I may just have to procure a copy of Horner's book just to ascertain the veracity of his claims. However, as I said before, I think it is extremely unlikely that they doctored the data and yet none of the conspirators has revealed that fact. But it has been revealed, Horner's book is but one,of several which make the aforementioned claim. Tens of thousands of people would have to be in on the conspiracy and I think it is impossible for so many people to keep a secret. If the Horner, et al, are correct, there are a few well placed people beating the drum, and a lot of other people cowered into silence. From what I know of human nature I suppose the likelihood of this is zero to 8 or 10 decimal places. I am surprised that you or anyone else takes this hypothesis seriously. IMHO, the truth is right in front of you. If there were only a few dozen people involved in the conspiracy, then it would be plausible that the data has been diddled with. Unless we're right of course, and it's a conspiracy of tens of thousands, done in plain sight. See my next post --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
thomas malloy wrote: Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. That's why they call it Climate Change, it covers them either way. It only covers them if the climate is, in fact, changing. It has to change in either direction, or in both directions in different seasons. If the average for winter is no colder than it was 50 or 100 years ago, and summer is no warmer, that means they are wrong. The test they face is just as rigorous and easy to verify as it would be if the change is only in one direction, so they are not "covered" in any sense. According to Christopher Horner, the AGW advocates have doctored the data to support the warning hypothesis, you OTOH, contend that the warming effect is real . . . Naturally I am assuming that they did not doctor the data. If they did, then the effect is not real. However, as I said before, I think it is extremely unlikely that they doctored the data and yet none of the conspirators has revealed that fact. Tens of thousands of people would have to be in on the conspiracy and I think it is impossible for so many people to keep a secret. From what I know of human nature I suppose the likelihood of this is zero to 8 or 10 decimal places. I am surprised that you or anyone else takes this hypothesis seriously. If there were only a few dozen people involved in the conspiracy, then it would be plausible that the data has been diddled with. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Jed Rothwell wrote: thomas malloy wrote: You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity of global warming observations. You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. An ongoing pattern where? In your state? Yes, Minnesota Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. That's why they call it Climate Change, it covers them either way. According to Christopher Horner, the AGW advocates have doctored the data to support the warning hypothesis, you OTOH, contend that the warming effect is real, at least in certain areas, to be continued --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
I have a spelling chequer. It came with my PC. It plane lee marks four my revue Miss steaks aye can knot sea. Eye ran this poem threw it, Your sure reel glad two no. Its vary polished inn it's weigh. My checker tolled me sew. A checker is a bless sing, It freeze yew lodes of thyme. It helps me right awl stiles two reed, And aides me when aye rime. Each frays come posed up on my screen Eye trussed too bee a joule. The checker pours o'er every word To cheque sum spelling rule. Bee fore a veiling checkers Hour spelling mite decline, And if we're lacks oar have a laps, We wood bee maid too wine. Butt now bee cause my spelling Is checked with such grate flare, Their are know faults with in my cite, Of nun eye am a wear. Now spelling does knot phase me, It does knot bring a tier. My pay purrs awl due glad den With wrapped words fare as hear. To rite with care is quite a feet Of witch won should bee proud, And wee mussed dew the best wee can, Sew flaws are knot aloud. Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays Such soft wear four pea seas, And why eye brake in two averse Buy righting want too pleas On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:14 PM, OrionWorks wrote: > Jed sez: > >> OrionWorks wrote: >> >>> This is obviously a sad, sad story where everyone looses. >> >> loses >> >> He looses his fateful sword, and she loses her head. >> >> (Sorry to make a joke a dreadful situation but it is a good mnemonic device >> which we sure need with English spelling.) >> >> - Jed > > Once again, caught red-handed falling on the swerd of my spiel checker. > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Jed sez: > OrionWorks wrote: > >> This is obviously a sad, sad story where everyone looses. > > loses > > He looses his fateful sword, and she loses her head. > > (Sorry to make a joke a dreadful situation but it is a good mnemonic device > which we sure need with English spelling.) > > - Jed Once again, caught red-handed falling on the swerd of my spiel checker. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
OrionWorks wrote: This is obviously a sad, sad story where everyone looses. loses He looses his fateful sword, and she loses her head. (Sorry to make a joke a dreadful situation but it is a good mnemonic device which we sure need with English spelling.) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Thomas sez: > According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for > March 12 this morning in Embarass. > Not to change the subject... well, actually I am going to change the subject... Back around Feb. 24, within the subject thread [OT - "The Rapture"] you once ranted: "If a fundamentalist Christian pastor had beheaded his wife, the media would have have gone into a full feeding frenzy about it. However when the Islamist activist beheaded his wife in their T V studio, it didn't rate a mention, except for talk radio." This is a blatantly inaccurate statement. Have you not been listening to the news? The latest from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/13/new.york.beheading/index.html This is obviously a sad, sad story where everyone looses. But it's not being swept under the rug, only to be discussed in in the wee hours of the morning on "talk radio." You give me the impression that you are not only very selective but also extremely creative in both your perceptions and your personal interpretations of what you perceive. But, alas, we can all be found guilty of that charge on occasion. ;-) Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
leaking pen wrote: > More importantly, winters are getting colder, from more open water and > less ice, causing more reflection back, More reflection? Doesn't sound right. Do you mean, rather, more radiation? As in, lower albedo means radiative cooling proceeds faster, not just radiative warming. > and summers hotter, melting > the ice, repeating the cycle. > > look at summer data, and winter data. hotter in summer, colder in > winter, than previous. This is why its called global climate change. > its not JUST warming... > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> thomas malloy wrote: >> You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity of global warming observations. >>> You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. >> An ongoing pattern where? In your state? In North America? This is not the >> worldwide trend. Temperatures in Japan and Europe, for example, remain at >> record highs this year. >> >> Also, trends that last only one year do not count. You have to look for >> broader, longer trends. There have been several cold years in the last few >> decades, but there have been many more hot years and the average is higher >> than previous norms. >> >> Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes >> including colder than normal temperatures in winter. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
More importantly, winters are getting colder, from more open water and less ice, causing more reflection back, and summers hotter, melting the ice, repeating the cycle. look at summer data, and winter data. hotter in summer, colder in winter, than previous. This is why its called global climate change. its not JUST warming... On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > thomas malloy wrote: > >>> You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity >>> of global warming observations. >> >> You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. > > An ongoing pattern where? In your state? In North America? This is not the > worldwide trend. Temperatures in Japan and Europe, for example, remain at > record highs this year. > > Also, trends that last only one year do not count. You have to look for > broader, longer trends. There have been several cold years in the last few > decades, but there have been many more hot years and the average is higher > than previous norms. > > Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes > including colder than normal temperatures in winter. > > - Jed > >
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Jed Rothwell wrote: > thomas malloy wrote: > >>> You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the >>> validity of global warming observations. >> >> You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. > > An ongoing pattern where? In your state? In North America? This is not > the worldwide trend. Temperatures in Japan and Europe, for example, > remain at record highs this year. > > Also, trends that last only one year do not count. You have to look for > broader, longer trends. There have been several cold years in the last > few decades, but there have been many more hot years and the average is > higher than previous norms. People without technical training often find it very difficult to grasp the difference between a single data point and a trend. Since the difference is fuzzy -- like the difference between a few grains of sand and a heap of sand -- this should not surprise us. Attempting to discuss such notions as fitting a least-squares trend line to the plot of the average global temperatures for the last 20 years is not going to get you very far with someone who thinks "mathematics" is the same a "arithmetic". And, of course, when you're dealing with someone who uses "faith based reasoning", attempting to prove *anything* by logic or by careful, detailed explanation is going to be an uphill battle. > > Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature > extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. Right -- in crude terms, major storms and unstable weather get an awful lot of their energy from evaporating sea water, and warming sea temperatures consequently provide more energy to drive them. So, you get more storms, and less stability, and the reduced stability results in more extreme temperatures of all sorts. In equally crude terms, warming the oceans changes the wind patterns, which results in redistributing the world's heat, and while that makes some places hotter, it also makes other places colder. Hurricanes (and typhoons and their other cousins from around the world) have been bad in the last few years and are expected to get worse in the future for the same reason: They're powered by warm seawater, and when the seawater's warmer, they have more power. Of course a chunk of this information comes to you from LLNL, where they mostly work on stuff that goes bang and where the thought police watch all the employees to make sure they're all loyal war mongers; none the less Thomas may feel the folks at LLNL are in cahoots with the left-wing socialist cabal which runs the mainstream media and so can't be trusted. Conspiracy theories all have one interesting feature in common: They cannot be disproved. Like creationism, they're intrinsically not falsifiable. This, alone, doesn't prove such theories wrong, of course. (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're *not* out to get you!)
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
thomas malloy wrote: You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity of global warming observations. You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. An ongoing pattern where? In your state? In North America? This is not the worldwide trend. Temperatures in Japan and Europe, for example, remain at record highs this year. Also, trends that last only one year do not count. You have to look for broader, longer trends. There have been several cold years in the last few decades, but there have been many more hot years and the average is higher than previous norms. Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Jed Rothwell wrote: thomas malloy wrote: According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for March 12 this morning in Embarass. You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity of global warming observations. You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
thomas malloy wrote: According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for March 12 this morning in Embarass. You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity of global warming observations. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold
Thomas sez: > According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for > March 12 this morning in Embarass. It's cold in Madison too. The following web site would seem to indicate that global temps have indeed cooled within the last twelve months: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/ But it's the long term trend that we ought to be concerned about, not an anomalous blip-dip in Embarass, MN. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/ Haven't you also agreed with the assessment that there is a warming trend occurring? Isn't the argument about who or what is causing the prolonged warming trend? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:I told you it was cold
According to a news report I just heard, Minnesota had a record low for March 12 this morning in Embarass. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
