On Thu, 26 May 2005 13:08:30 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
Wrong. Ice provides carbon dioxide samples that are available for any
given year. These samples are measured for C14 concentrations, fossil
fuels having a much lower concentration of C14 than natural processes.
The difference is quantified as the percentage of CO2 contributed by
combustion of fossil fuels. Therefore, the contribution of atmospheric
CO2 from human sources is very accurately measured.

No they are not. Since CO2 can come from a variety of places including
volcanos, and large forest fires any of which can skew those results.


Wrong. Volcanos give off very little CO2 -- most of the gasses are
Hydrogen Sulfide and oxides of Sulfer. And the Carbon Dioxide from
forest fires is easily calculated. In fact, forest fires (both recent
and ancient) are studied for their impact on the environment and have
been found to cause very little variation in CO2 concentration simply
because they occur every year, and are actually -decreasing- in both
frequency and intensity.


When the apparent variation in the sun's energy output is taken into
consideration, it becomes very difficult to determine the exact rate
of global warming and how much of it is part of the cyclic climatic
change and how much of it is caused strictly as a result of human
activity.


Wrong. Solar variations can be determined from tree ring growth, and
when compared to ice samples they can be differentiated from CO2
concentrations.


snip
Well, sure,,,Frank taugh you better regarding radio technical
competency,

Frank has some issues as well. He failed to recognize common industry
terms, and discredited my explanations of common electronic circuits
because they didn't fit within his own narrow "education".


I recognized the "terms" as being poorly defined slang used by some
who are without formal education in the field.

I'm sure the senior level engineers who I work with would take
exception to your highly sheltered and quite ignorant claims.


Yet for some reason, you are -still- unable (or unwilling) to provide
the names of those "senior level engineers".


And your explanations
don't fit within any educational (or engineering) standards, despite
your bogus claim to have had some formal education in electronics.

Which only shows just how sheltered your own education and (more
importantly) your real world experience has been.


Yet for some reason, you are -still- unable (or unwilling) to name the
tech school you claim to have attended.


you called him names and took issue with his career.

I was he who first started to degrade my education and career. I only
kept the same level of civility.


You may have matched my level of 'civility' (subject to debate), but
you didn't even come close to my level of education and experience in
the field of electronics.

Frank, like my mother once said: Self praise stinks, and boy do you
smell......


Probably because I've been busy working on my garage. But the fact
remains that, no matter how you would like to believe otherwise, your
education and experience in the field doesn't measure up to mine.


On the contrary, you tried to denounce me
with nothing but ignorance, generalizations and subjective opinions.

Which is exactly what you did.


Wrong. I provided facts and logic. You choose to ignore any facts or
logic that isn't consistent with your "core beliefs".


So once again I ask: Where are your facts, Dave?

Where are yours? Oh that's right, they're on that website right next
to the one with all the left wing anti-war propaganda.......


I've provided fact after fact after fact. All the facts I have
provided can be independently verified by yourself and anyone else
willing to do so. You have provided nothing of the sort in -any-
topic.


snip
.... No one is perfect. If the best you
can come up with is 2 mistakes that I made in 10 years worth of
posting, I'd say that's a pretty good percentage.


You may have -admitted- two of the many mistakes you have made in 10
years. IMO, that's a pretty -poor- percentage.

I'll leave it to you and your obsessed minion Twisty to dig up all of
my mistakes. Until then, your ****ing in the wind.


Jim
tried talking to you about foreign news sources, and you called him
naive.

If someone truly thinks that a foreign news service is any less likely
to be affected by political bias, then they are naive.


Yet you claim that domestic news services are heavily biased to the
left. If that's true then foreign news services are -more- likely to
be -less- biased, which makes -you- naive.

That statement makes absolutely no logical sense.


Only because you are incapable of thinking logically.


Where is the logic
that supports your claim that a foreign news service bias is in any
way connected to domestic news services?


That's not what I said, Dave. Learn to read instead of gazing into
your crystal ball.


Of course your statement, however ignorant and illogical, still did
not address my claim which was that foreign news services are just as
likely to be politically swayed as any in this country. They are not
immune to agenda driven slant. But the exact degree of bias relative
to domestic services is irrelevant. You care to deny that?


Absolutely. Any news service is subject to bias simply because must
decide if any given article is newsworthy. US news services are biased
because of corporate ownership influences and target audience
demographics. IOW, the Dutch are far less concerned with American news
than Americans, so an independent Dutch news agency is going to have
far less bias than any US news service, NPR included.


I suppose
you would find Al-Jazeera to be the bastion of objectivity?


I don't think Jim claimed to get his news from Al-Jazeera. Or is that
something you divined from your crystal ball?




snip
Care is not a "simile" for "disagree". When you figure that out, you may
ask such questions.


You need to learn the difference between a 'simile' and a 'metaphor'.
Didn't you ever watch that Danny DeVito movie where he played Kotter
to a group of Army dimwits?

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Twisty should learn the difference
between those terms. You did know to whom you were directing your
comments right?


No, I didn't. But since you didn't spot his error, my statement
stands.


Your word games and semantic shuffle will not allow you to wiggle out
of that so easily. If one does not post their opinions, how do we know
what they think on any topic?


Several people have posted opinions that are contrary to your's.

Several? Hardly. Other than you Twisty and sometimes Landshark (Who's
mostly annoyed at the continuing banter), who else has disagreed with
my advice on CB radio?


After 10 years of posting I'm sure I could find more than a few in the
archives.


If you want to talk about politics, there are
too few facts to make any definitive choice as to who is "right" or
"wrong".


Regardless, there are -many- people who have posted political opinions
that are contrary to your own warped and subjective whinings.


Nobody (except one of your sock puppets) has posted -any- opinion that
supports or defends -your- opinions, even in rec.boats.

I have had many supporting opinions. Heck, in rec.boats, the
conservatives are pretty much even with the liberals.


You must be cross-posting to an alternative universe because that's
not what comes up on my newsreader.


The
conservatives mount far better logical arguments. The liberals there
tend to limit their opinions to blindly regurgitating talking points
and cut and paste articles written by other people. So much for
independent thought.


They "regurgitate" their arguments in order to find some path of
understanding through your thick skull and to your brain, assuming you
actually have a brain.


And I have no sock puppets, your attempt to bolster your own sagging
credibility by trying to discredit mine notwithstanding. You are
becoming as paranoid and narcissistic as Twisty.


Doesn't matter since your only supporter has left the building.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----