Global Warming The debbil made me do it

On Mar 9, 12:25 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any global
warming
scenario.

Really? Name two.

Can't speak for Iowa, but perhaps wading through 19,000 signatures
will dampen your anti-denier zeal?

http://www.oism.org/pproject/index.htm

HAW-HAW-HAW!

At last--The Oregon Petition!

I *knew* one of you dupes would drag that in here. Gotcha!

The OP is a fraud. Deniers cite it to claim there are19,000 (or 17,000 or
21,000) scientists who doubt that AGW is real. There aren't, but guys like
you will believe it without checking because you desperately want to. Just
like you believe the "they were predicting global cooling in 1970" lie, the
"CO2 is a tiny part of the atmosphere so it can't cause warming" lie and a
dozen others.

You should be noticing by now that the sources you get this stuff from are
bull****ting you. How many lemon used cars do you have to buy before you
realize the dealer is screwing you? A bunch, apparently, since you bought the
Oregon Petition, too.

Skeptics have already waded through the OP: "Scientific American took a
sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a
climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various
databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition -- one was an active
climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based
on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today,
three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not
answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters
include a core of about 200 climate researchers - a respectable number, though
rather a small fraction of the climatological community"

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

So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do with climate
science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is real, isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

Dan

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587 @attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?


'Big oily *******' and 'Regularly all lymphnodes park here'.


Bertie

Dan wrote in
:

On Mar 9, 12:25 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming
scenario.

Really? Name two.

Can't speak for Iowa, but perhaps wading through 19,000 signatures
will dampen your anti-denier zeal?

http://www.oism.org/pproject/index.htm

HAW-HAW-HAW!

At last--The Oregon Petition!

I *knew* one of you dupes would drag that in here. Gotcha!

The OP is a fraud. Deniers cite it to claim there are19,000 (or
17,000 or 21,000) scientists who doubt that AGW is real. There
aren't, but guys like you will believe it without checking because
you desperately want to. Just like you believe the "they were
predicting global cooling in 1970" lie, the "CO2 is a tiny part of
the atmosphere so it can't cause warming" lie and a dozen others.

You should be noticing by now that the sources you get this stuff
from are bull****ting you. How many lemon used cars do you have to
buy before you realize the dealer is screwing you? A bunch,
apparently, since you bought the Oregon Petition, too.

Skeptics have already waded through the OP: "Scientific American
took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D.
in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in
various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition -- one
was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise,
and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would
not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such
petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages.
Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of
about 200 climate researchers - a respectable number, though rather a
small fraction of the climatological community"

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

So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do with
climate science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate
researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is real,
isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.


You're going to be shoveling a lot more of it due to global warming.


Bertie

"Dan Luke" wrote in
:


"Jay Honeck" wrote:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any global
warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Another evasion, I note.

You don't know anything about the science behind this subject, do you,
Jay?

You're willing to assert it's all a crock without having made any
effort to understand what you're condemning.


It's 'what he does'


Bertie

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587 @attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?


'Big oily *******' and 'Regularly all lymphnodes park here'.

How's life? I was glad to see upon my return that you seem to
have a bit more time these days to devote to keeping the lazy
and the stupid in their place.


You know, ups and downs. I get more time than I used to cuz company now
pay for BB in hotel rooms... There also seems to be a sudden glut of the
lazy and stupid these days.


Bertie

In , Kadaitcha Man
said:
: "Peter J Ross" wrote in message
: ...
: In alt.usenet.kooks on Sat, 8 Mar 2008 20:06:17 +0000 (UTC), Bertie
: the Bunyip wrote:
:
: "John T" wrote in
: m:
:
: "Dan Luke" wrote in message
:
:
: "The opposite of science is not religion; the opposite of science is
: wishful thinking."
: -John Derbyshire
:
: Yup. That's what the AGW crowd uses as justification for their
: hysteria.
:
:
: **** you. I'm not hysterical.
:
: Bertie
:
: NEITHER AM I AND I'LL SUE ANYONE WHO SAYS DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:
: It's moments like these I wish I had the Berserker running. I'd hit both of
: those posts with the Tourette Bot
:
: However I'm only in Oz for a few days to visit my kids so it's not been
: worth setting up.

poopies.

--
Kali

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587 @attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in
any global warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?


'Big oily *******' and 'Regularly all lymphnodes park here'.

How's life? I was glad to see upon my return that you seem to
have a bit more time these days to devote to keeping the lazy
and the stupid in their place.


You know, ups and downs. I get more time than I used to cuz company
now pay for BB in hotel rooms... There also seems to be a sudden glut
of the lazy and stupid these days.

I got lured out of retirement last summer by an old friend who
needed help with his IT shop. I've finally gotten things to
where I have some time to play again.

I don't know if its the relative anonymity or what, but teh
usernetz has always seemed to hold a fascination for the
mentally challenged. A 'target-rich' environment.

I kinda dried up my corner for a while, but there's kooks-a-plenty all
the sudden.

Bertie

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587
@attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any global
warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?

--

"I never thought there were corners in time
until I was told to go stand in one"
.....Grace Slick

"Dan" wrote:

So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do with
climate
science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is real, isn't
it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

You haven't got any climate researchers. If you did, you could post links to
their peer-reviewed research.

You got suckered by a bogus petition. Because you wanted to


I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You don't even know what it means.

Don't strain your back.

On Mar 9, 12:56 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote :



On Mar 9, 12:25 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming
scenario.

Really? Name two.

Can't speak for Iowa, but perhaps wading through 19,000 signatures
will dampen your anti-denier zeal?

http://www.oism.org/pproject/index.htm

HAW-HAW-HAW!

At last--The Oregon Petition!

I *knew* one of you dupes would drag that in here. Gotcha!

The OP is a fraud. Deniers cite it to claim there are19,000 (or
17,000 or 21,000) scientists who doubt that AGW is real. There
aren't, but guys like you will believe it without checking because
you desperately want to. Just like you believe the "they were
predicting global cooling in 1970" lie, the "CO2 is a tiny part of
the atmosphere so it can't cause warming" lie and a dozen others.

You should be noticing by now that the sources you get this stuff
from are bull****ting you. How many lemon used cars do you have to
buy before you realize the dealer is screwing you? A bunch,
apparently, since you bought the Oregon Petition, too.

Skeptics have already waded through the OP: "Scientific American
took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D.
in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in
various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition -- one
was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise,
and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would
not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such
petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages.
Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of
about 200 climate researchers - a respectable number, though rather a
small fraction of the climatological community"

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

So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do with
climate science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate
researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is real,
isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You're going to be shoveling a lot more of it due to global warming.

Bertie


Fine by me.

I'll just move to Iowa where's it gonna be paradise pretty soon!

Dan