Global Warming The debbil made me do it

"Dan Luke" wrote in message


http://www.sourcewatch.org
http://www.realclimate.org

Not examples of balanced or un-biased sites. These don't help you any more
than using http://junkscience.com would help me convince you of the fallacy
of your belief in AGW.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

"John T" wrote:

http://www.sourcewatch.org
http://www.realclimate.org

Not examples of balanced or un-biased sites. These don't help you any more
than using http://junkscience.com would help me convince you of the fallacy
of your belief in AGW.

Invalid comparison.

junkscience is run by a lobbyist with a documented history of creating
disinformation in the service of tobacco, chemical and oil corporations.
Although Milloy frequently represents himself as an expert on scientific
matters, he is not a scientist himself. He has never published original
research in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

You may disagree with the scientists on RealClimate, but their reputations in
their profession are intact despite years of slander (against Mann, in
particular) by people like Milloy.

On Mar 8, 2:48 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"John T" wrote:
http://www.sourcewatch.org
http://www.realclimate.org

Not examples of balanced or un-biased sites. These don't help you any more
than usinghttp://junkscience.comwould help me convince you of the fallacy
of your belief in AGW.

Invalid comparison.

junkscience is run by a lobbyist with a documented history of creating
disinformation in the service of tobacco, chemical and oil corporations.
Although Milloy frequently represents himself as an expert on scientific
matters, he is not a scientist himself. He has never published original
research in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

You may disagree with the scientists on RealClimate, but their reputations in
their profession are intact despite years of slander (against Mann, in
particular) by people like Milloy.

I'm learning more -- such as -- your guys are pure, unsullied by
interests, while anyone who dares proffer contrary data must be a
minion of the evil capitalists...

I admire your expertise in the resorting to the ad hominem argument.

OK, done for now. heading outside to chop down a tree and burn it for
heat.

Dan

Dan wrote in
:

On Mar 8, 2:48 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"John T" wrote:
http://www.sourcewatch.org
http://www.realclimate.org

Not examples of balanced or un-biased sites. These don't help you
any more than usinghttp://junkscience.comwould help me convince you
of the fallacy of your belief in AGW.

Invalid comparison.

junkscience is run by a lobbyist with a documented history of
creating disinformation in the service of tobacco, chemical and oil
corporations. Although Milloy frequently represents himself as an
expert on scientific matters, he is not a scientist himself. He has
never published original research in peer-reviewed scientific
journals.

You may disagree with the scientists on RealClimate, but their
reputations in their profession are intact despite years of slander
(against Mann, in particular) by people like Milloy.

I'm learning more -- such as -- your guys are pure, unsullied by
interests, while anyone who dares proffer contrary data must be a
minion of the evil capitalists...

IOW, you have no interest in learning anything but how to reinforce your
postition.


I admire your expertise in the resorting to the ad hominem argument.

Bull****.

OK, done for now. heading outside to chop down a tree and burn it for
heat.


Which will grow a new tree in time.
Good start..



Bertie

On Mar 8, 3:44 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

OK, done for now. heading outside to chop down a tree and burn it for
heat.

Which will grow a new tree in time.
Good start..

Bertie

Yep. That's how it works. Great system, eh?

Dan wrote in news:7422c4dc-9cf1-46fa-a318-
:

On Mar 8, 3:44 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

OK, done for now. heading outside to chop down a tree and burn it
for
heat.

Which will grow a new tree in time.
Good start..

Bertie

Yep. That's how it works. Great system, eh?



Yes, it is.



Bertie

On Mar 8, 4:27 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Yep. That's how it works. Great system, eh?

Yes, it is.

Bertie

OK.. story time...

In July 1983 I was an Air Force NCO (sergeant) working 7 day/week12
hour night shifts (6 PM to 6 AM) helping stand-up the Air Launched
Cruise Missile (ALCM) for the 416 Bombardment Wing at Griffiss Air
Force base in upstate NY.

At the time the missile's fielding was in the news as the Soviets
claimed it was "destabilizing" etc, etc. The ALCM was also an issue in
Canadian politics as we (The US Air Force) used a test range in the
Northwest territories which resembled Soviet terrain.

For a variety of reasons, a group of Canadians marched from Canada
down to Rome, NY to protest.

After a shift the day was perfect -- sunny, warm, light breeze. I was
sick of driving home, sleeping, getting up, and driving back, so on a
lark I jumped in my blue Ford Escort and headed north.

I was still in uniform when I came upon the marchers out in desolate
stretch of backcountry road. I smiled and waved as I drove north as
they marched south, but I don't think they knew who or what I was.

Near the end of the line a few guys jumped the line and made me stop
my car. When a few saw my uniform they scurried off, until half a
dozen surrounded my car. I rolled the windows down and said, "So
what's going on, eh?"

(As background -- my mother's family is Canadian and I spent my first
5 years in Canada and every summer after that. This meant I had the
twin cultural burdens of arrogance and guilt).

A few shouted slogans and I just waved them off.

One stayed near the passenger side window and had a cooler head. Soon
we were in a deep discussion about the nature of war, the insanity of
MAD, and the relative morality of Soviet and American empire.

This went on for about 45 minutes, when it dawned on both of us that
his group was now far, far down the road.

"Hop in and I'll give you a ride back," says I.

"Sure," says he and away we go, passing slow enough that everyone in
the crowd could see one of their number being hauled away in a Blue
Escort by a US Air Force NCO.

I stopped at the head of the line and he got out. We shook hands and
wished each other well while his cohorts looked on it stunned shock.

I drove home and went to bed, thinking nothing more of it, until the
next day when the Squadron First Sergeant said the CO heard about some
rogue Airmen helping out the protesters (they later made it on base
and threw some blood/red paint on the bone bird -- a B-52 hulk used
for parts and lightly guarded).

I borrowed my wife's car the next few days.




Dan


NY Times link: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9659482 60)

"Dan Luke" wrote in message


Invalid comparison.

Not at all. All those sites are designed specifically to promote a
particular point of view and not provide balanced reporting of raw data.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

"John T" wrote in
:

"Dan Luke" wrote in message


http://www.sourcewatch.org
http://www.realclimate.org

Not examples of balanced or un-biased sites. These don't help you any
more than using http://junkscience.com would help me convince you of
the fallacy of your belief in AGW.



it's pretty obvious you won;t be convinced. I'm pretty much resigned to
watching idiots like you sell my kids future down the Suwanee...

At least I'll have the pleasure of telling you I told you so in the
fulness of time..
Not much, but it will have to do.

Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message


it's pretty obvious you won;t be convinced.

Not until the data proves AGW is correct. I don't dispute recent increases
in temperature, but I have not seen any conclusive link to human activity
being the cause nor have I seen evidence the temperature changes are outside
"normal" ranges.

This is not some blind adherence to a pre-determined position nor is it
succumbing to peer pressure (which your lame "idiot" reference attempts to
accomplish). Take a look for yourself at the raw data for temperature
reconstructions from NASA and other sources. Here's a good start:
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/ (particularly the paleoclimate sets)

I've been perusing this site and others for a few years now downloading and
charting the data myself to see what the trends are. Frankly, in a
historical sense, recent temperature changes are entirely within "normal"
parameters for temperature reconstructions in both northern and southern
hemispheres.

The only temperature reconstructions that show alarming trends are those
based on the data sets like Mann's famed "hockey stick" and those data sets
have been questioned enough by his peers that I don't need to do so here.

The fact remains: Current temperatures are well within the norm defined as
the range of temperatures for the last 8,000 years.

(Nice try with the distro expansion, BTW.)

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________