| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
In article ,
David wrote: On 20 Apr 2007 08:26:43 -0700, "ve3..." wrote: Material herein could lead to cognitive dissonance. Indeed... http://www.realclimate.org/ Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
"Cato" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 21, 6:44 am, "Brian O" wrote: "Cato" wrote in message ups.com... On Apr 19, 7:36 pm, RHF wrote: On Apr 19, 7:14 pm, m II wrote: RHF wrote: Roadie - Killing to Eat and Live is One Thing. Killing for a Baby Seal's Pure White Fur to make Fur Coats is another. hopefully you can understand the difference ~ RHF So...do the occupiers in Iraq actually EAT the dead or just use the skins? mike M II - There You Go Again ! ! ! Thinking Like a Can-A-Duh-Ian "Killing to Eat and Live is One Thing" In Iraq our good American Soldiers are Killing the Enemy - To Stay Alive [.] Hopefully You Do Not Consider the Canadain Troops now in Afghanistan as Killers ? ? ?http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20050804/afghanis... Prime Minister Stephen Harper reaffirmed his government's commitment to Canadian troops serving in Afghanistan.http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/0...ghanistan06031 3.html Mike - Take a Deep Breath and Focus Keep Telling Yourself : I Am a Canadian ! I Love Canada ! - I Am Proud To Be a Canadian ! God {Allah} Bless Canada and All Canadians ! it ain't nice - it's hell - it's called war ~ RHF and the reality of war often it comes down to a moment-in-time {instant} where you must decide to : kill-or-be-killed [.] . . . . Hell, I'm a dumbass canuck too. So our Canadian boys are over in Afghanistan fighting Taliban and Al Queda sickos, and doing a fine job, and helping build schools and hospitals, and handing out radios and candies, but they keep getting blown up by I.E.D's and asshole suicide bombers. How the hell do you fight that? The Yanks and the Brits are having all kinds of trouble with these I.E.D.s and suicide assholes as well in Iraq. It's one thing to get into a hell of a firefight, O.K., it's war, but it's another thing when you don't see what's coming with I.E.D.s and suicide assholes. My oldest boy might be going over with the "Lincs & Winks" and my second oldest is thinking of signing up. What the .......!!!!! Cato Woud you rather he go fight, or just sit back and wait till they come to your house to kill you all?? I have nothing against my boys serving their country, and fighting against evil. Canada did it's part in WW I & WW II, the Boer War, Korea, (Yep, we were fighting there too.) the Balkan's, Cyprus in the 60's. (O.K., we stayed out of 'Nam and Iraq, Our government decided to stay out of those two conflicts.) And my family has been there going all the way back to 1812, and the American Revolution, and the French & Indian War. (Sorry, half our family was for the Patriots, half for King George, in the Rev War. It split the family. Tha'ts why I'm a "dumbass canuck", our half of the family came to Canada after the Rev War, the half that supported the Patriots still live in the States. They are the American part of the family.) Hell, ya, I know it's war, Ya, I'll let them go if their hearts are set on it, But do you see something wrong with my hating I.E.D.s & suicide bombers??? That way of fighting, I.E.D.s and suicide bombers, ****es me off. Ya it's reality, ya it's the way these Taliban and Al Qaeda assholes fight us. You don't get a chance to shoot back. You don't get a chance to see your enemy and fight back. You're just dead. Blown to bits. One moment your driving along with your buddies, then it's all over. And a lot of innocent men, women and children, often get killed as well. Being a fighting man, and fighting other men is one thing. Seeing innocent men, women and especially little kids getting blown up by these Taliban, Al Qaeda assholes is sick. We've got to erase these killers from the face of the earth. We have to be there, I agree. Ya, that's one of the reasons why we have to go and kill these assholes. And 9/11 of course. Nobody will ever forget that black day. I agree. But I still hate those god damn I.E.D.s, and asshole suicide bombers. So what the ****s wrong with my hating I.E.D.'s and asshole suicide bombers when ther're killing our boys and innocent people????????? Don't tell me that they don't bother you!!! Cato Yeah, its cowardly. But that's the enemy we face. They are too cowardly to get a regular army and fight. But, as the US learned with Vietnam, there are ways to deal with gorillas. Time is the only way to get to them. It eventually pays off. When they get tired of the killing before we do, then they will stop. Therefore, we HAVE to persevere, we CANNOT stop taking the war to them. And that is what we are doing in Iraq. Troops there are going house to house, every day, putting their lives on the line, to get these cowards. That's something the news doesn't tell you. They want you to think they are just standing around over there while a car bomber just drives up and blows them all up. That isn't what's happening. There is STILL a LOT of fighting going on over there. That is exactly why the surge in the amount of troops is quelling the attacks for the most part. They NOW have enough to KEEP troops in place rather than just chase the cowards from house to house and back to the one they were in before. Time is the secret. That's why President Bush said this would be a LONG war. But the liberals in the US keep living in this fantasy utopia in which they think these cowards will be negotiated with. The people of the US need to stand with the President and have the guts to keep fighting, even if it means loss of life, or property on their part. They did that in WWII, they DIDNT do it with Vietnam, and they aren't doing it now. Why? Because Americans these days are selfish self centered dishonest lovers of themselves. When a country gets away from caring about its country and its people, and begin to sink into self-serving anarchy, then what is happening in the US is what will happen anywhere. Until that changes, countries will fall from within, and if the US continues down the path of trying to live in its fantasy utopia, it will fall, hard. B |
Global Warming / Hundreds of Fishing Boats . .
On Apr 20, 8:02 am, RHF wrote:
On Apr 20, 4:00 am, wrote: -- Did you know that every glacier in North America is advancing? T - Wrong . . . http://www.nichols.edu/departments/g...er_retreat.htm If you read and understand the whole thing. Glaciers Grow and Srink over time. Shrink ? From 1550 to 1850 on average the World Glaciers Grew. Link ?? S N I P - Where is a link supporting this, and other statement?? - - - Where was Al Gore to tell us about "We're Having A Heat Wave Again !" Go Rent " An Inconvenient truth" - really, it's a good film . . . Be Brave.... Listening to LOTS of traffic on 11.175 . . . |
Global Warming / Crichton " State of Fear"
On Apr 19, 9:55 pm, RHF wrote:
On Apr 19, 7:47 am, Ian Jackson wrote: In message .com, ve3... writes A CBC News report at 10 pm stated that hundreds of fishing boats and a Coast Guard vessel were caught in a giant pack ice field off the east cost of Newfoundland. Although most marine communication is VHF , there may be some HF communications going on. I am out of range, but maybe some closer could have a listen to Coast Guard and fish boat frequencies. Is this further evidence of global warming? Ian. -- Send in Al Gore with his Magical Mystery Tour and Bring Forth "Gobal Warming" to Melt them Free ~ RHF . . . . http://www.environmentaldefense.org/...contentid=4371 State of Fear: Even if warming is occurring, there is little evidence of human causality. The facts: Attribution of global warming to a specific cause or causes is admittedly difficult, but a variety of independent lines of investigation all point to human emissions of CO2 and other GHGs as a major culprit: No one has been able to put forward a self-consistent and quantitative explanation for the warming in the latter half of the 20th century without invoking the effects of the GHG from human activities; The "smoking gun" pointing to industrial emissions as the culprit in global warming has been identified in the spatial and temporal worldwide patterns of warming in the atmosphere and oceans; and Global temperatures in the last few decades appear to be warmer than in any other time period over the past 2,000 years. State of Fear: Predictions of global warming are based on climate- model calculations that cannot be relied upon; results from different models disagree by more than 400%. The facts: Highly advanced climate models have been thoroughly and carefully vetted by the scientific community. It is true that these models project a wide range in the warming of the globe by 2100 (i.e., from about 3 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit). Much of this range arises from differing assumptions about economic, demographic and technological trends that influence CO2 emissions, not in the models' simulation of the effects of these emissions on climate. All of the models predict that increasing CO2 emissions will lead to further warming of the globe and that the more we emit CO2 in the future, the more the globe will warm. This is actually good news because it suggests we can actually do something about global warming; that is, cut emissions of CO2 and other GHGs. |
Global Warming / Crichton " State of Fear"
On Apr 21, 3:01 pm, wrote:
On Apr 19, 9:55 pm, RHF wrote: On Apr 19, 7:47 am, Ian Jackson wrote: In message .com, ve3... writes A CBC News report at 10 pm stated that hundreds of fishing boats and a Coast Guard vessel were caught in a giant pack ice field off the east cost of Newfoundland. Although most marine communication is VHF , there may be some HF communications going on. I am out of range, but maybe some closer could have a listen to Coast Guard and fish boat frequencies. Is this further evidence of global warming? Ian. -- Send in Al Gore with his Magical Mystery Tour and Bring Forth "Gobal Warming" to Melt them Free ~ RHF . . . . http://www.environmentaldefense.org/...contentid=4371 State of Fear: Even if warming is occurring, there is little evidence of human causality. The facts: Attribution of global warming to a specific cause or causes is admittedly difficult, but a variety of independent lines of investigation all point to human emissions of CO2 and other GHGs as a major culprit: No one has been able to put forward a self-consistent and quantitative explanation for the warming in the latter half of the 20th century without invoking the effects of the GHG from human activities; The "smoking gun" pointing to industrial emissions as the culprit in global warming has been identified in the spatial and temporal worldwide patterns of warming in the atmosphere and oceans; and Global temperatures in the last few decades appear to be warmer than in any other time period over the past 2,000 years. State of Fear: Predictions of global warming are based on climate- model calculations that cannot be relied upon; results from different models disagree by more than 400%. The facts: Highly advanced climate models have been thoroughly and carefully vetted by the scientific community. It is true that these models project a wide range in the warming of the globe by 2100 (i.e., from about 3 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit). Much of this range arises from differing assumptions about economic, demographic and technological trends that influence CO2 emissions, not in the models' simulation of the effects of these emissions on climate. All of the models predict that increasing CO2 emissions will lead to further warming of the globe and that the more we emit CO2 in the future, the more the globe will warm. This is actually good news because it suggests we can actually do something about global warming; that is, cut emissions of CO2 and other GHGs.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Blaming humans is a scam. They just want to put more government controls on everyone, since Communism and the Cold War didn't work. We've gone from perhaps 313 parts per million CO2 in 1960 to perhaps 375 parts per million in 2005. That PARTS PER MILLION. That's almost nothing. How about the times in the distant past when the earth didn't have any polar caps at all? The climate will always change. It's natural. How about The Medieval Warm Period that was even warmer then out time. Or how about The Little Ice Age. Were we responsible for those times too??? We didn't suffer disaster during those times, did we??? What about Mars polar caps shrinking. Are we causing that? Apparently Pluto is warming up. And it isn't getting close to the Sun. Some moons in the Solar System are warming up. And new storms on some of the big gas giants are apparently due to temperature changes on those planets. Maybe we have Solar System warming. Maybe it has something to do with our orbital path around the sun gradually changing, or the amount of tilt of our axis, or the precession of the equinox, The precession of the equinox is a cycle of 25,765 years. There are a lot of other things that can cause Global Warming or cooling. How about changes in the energy output of the Sun. The Sun has many more cycles then just the eleven years sun spot cycle. Some of them lasting thousands of years, some of them hundreds of thousands of years. How about the solar systems place in the Galaxy, Sometimes we are in the thick part of a galactic arm. Sometimes in a thin part. (Very dusty and gassy, or very little dust and gas. This can effect the amount of both solar radiation and interstellar radiation. That can effect the amount of cloud cover/ water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor is much more of a greenhouse gas then CO2.) Take a look at this film. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31355859226455 Cato |
Global Warming / Crichton " State of Fear"
On Apr 21, 6:55 pm, Cato wrote:
Cato Dispelling Crichton's Myths Here are just a few contentions that are made by Crichton's "climate skeptic" hero in the book, together with what the scientific evidence actually says. State of Fear: Temperatures in some locations are actually cooling, so how can the globe be warming? The facts: True, temperatures are cooling -- in a few select locales. Global warming refers to a warming of the average global temperature. It does not preclude cooling in some locations. Indeed, if some locations are cooling while the globe is warming on average, it follows that there must be other areas that are warming even faster than the global average. In fact, that is exactly what is happening in the Arctic, where temperatures over the past few decades have risen twice as fast as the global average, with potentially disastrous environmental consequences (see our January 2005 Solutions newsletter). This is but one example of Crichton's selective use of data in his book to advance a specious argument. The establishment of a global trend requires that one consider a global database, not data from a few select sites. As in the case of global temperatures, Crichton uses selective and incomplete data to argue that glaciers are not melting and that sea levels are not rising. The fact is that a careful analysis of the complete global database firmly establishes that ice over the land and sea is thinning and melting and that, on average, sea levels are rising. |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
Telamon wrote:
Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win. |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
"Brian O" wrote in message ... "Cato" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 21, 6:44 am, "Brian O" wrote: "Cato" wrote in message ups.com... On Apr 19, 7:36 pm, RHF wrote: On Apr 19, 7:14 pm, m II wrote: RHF wrote: Roadie - Killing to Eat and Live is One Thing. Killing for a Baby Seal's Pure White Fur to make Fur Coats is another. hopefully you can understand the difference ~ RHF So...do the occupiers in Iraq actually EAT the dead or just use the skins? mike M II - There You Go Again ! ! ! Thinking Like a Can-A-Duh-Ian "Killing to Eat and Live is One Thing" In Iraq our good American Soldiers are Killing the Enemy - To Stay Alive [.] Hopefully You Do Not Consider the Canadain Troops now in Afghanistan as Killers ? ? ?http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20050804/afghanis... Prime Minister Stephen Harper reaffirmed his government's commitment to Canadian troops serving in Afghanistan.http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/0...ghanistan06031 3.html Mike - Take a Deep Breath and Focus Keep Telling Yourself : I Am a Canadian ! I Love Canada ! - I Am Proud To Be a Canadian ! God {Allah} Bless Canada and All Canadians ! it ain't nice - it's hell - it's called war ~ RHF and the reality of war often it comes down to a moment-in-time {instant} where you must decide to : kill-or-be-killed [.] . . . . Hell, I'm a dumbass canuck too. So our Canadian boys are over in Afghanistan fighting Taliban and Al Queda sickos, and doing a fine job, and helping build schools and hospitals, and handing out radios and candies, but they keep getting blown up by I.E.D's and asshole suicide bombers. How the hell do you fight that? The Yanks and the Brits are having all kinds of trouble with these I.E.D.s and suicide assholes as well in Iraq. It's one thing to get into a hell of a firefight, O.K., it's war, but it's another thing when you don't see what's coming with I.E.D.s and suicide assholes. My oldest boy might be going over with the "Lincs & Winks" and my second oldest is thinking of signing up. What the .......!!!!! Cato Woud you rather he go fight, or just sit back and wait till they come to your house to kill you all?? I have nothing against my boys serving their country, and fighting against evil. Canada did it's part in WW I & WW II, the Boer War, Korea, (Yep, we were fighting there too.) the Balkan's, Cyprus in the 60's. (O.K., we stayed out of 'Nam and Iraq, Our government decided to stay out of those two conflicts.) And my family has been there going all the way back to 1812, and the American Revolution, and the French & Indian War. (Sorry, half our family was for the Patriots, half for King George, in the Rev War. It split the family. Tha'ts why I'm a "dumbass canuck", our half of the family came to Canada after the Rev War, the half that supported the Patriots still live in the States. They are the American part of the family.) Hell, ya, I know it's war, Ya, I'll let them go if their hearts are set on it, But do you see something wrong with my hating I.E.D.s & suicide bombers??? That way of fighting, I.E.D.s and suicide bombers, ****es me off. Ya it's reality, ya it's the way these Taliban and Al Qaeda assholes fight us. You don't get a chance to shoot back. You don't get a chance to see your enemy and fight back. You're just dead. Blown to bits. One moment your driving along with your buddies, then it's all over. And a lot of innocent men, women and children, often get killed as well. Being a fighting man, and fighting other men is one thing. Seeing innocent men, women and especially little kids getting blown up by these Taliban, Al Qaeda assholes is sick. We've got to erase these killers from the face of the earth. We have to be there, I agree. Ya, that's one of the reasons why we have to go and kill these assholes. And 9/11 of course. Nobody will ever forget that black day. I agree. But I still hate those god damn I.E.D.s, and asshole suicide bombers. So what the ****s wrong with my hating I.E.D.'s and asshole suicide bombers when ther're killing our boys and innocent people????????? Don't tell me that they don't bother you!!! Cato Yeah, its cowardly. But that's the enemy we face. They are too cowardly to get a regular army and fight. But, as the US learned with Vietnam, there are ways to deal with gorillas. Time is the only way to get to them. It eventually pays off. When they get tired of the killing before we do, then they will stop. Therefore, we HAVE to persevere, we CANNOT stop taking the war to them. And that is what we are doing in Iraq. Troops there are going house to house, every day, putting their lives on the line, to get these cowards. That's something the news doesn't tell you. They want you to think they are just standing around over there while a car bomber just drives up and blows them all up. That isn't what's happening. There is STILL a LOT of fighting going on over there. That is exactly why the surge in the amount of troops is quelling the attacks for the most part. They NOW have enough to KEEP troops in place rather than just chase the cowards from house to house and back to the one they were in before. Time is the secret. That's why President Bush said this would be a LONG war. But the liberals in the US keep living in this fantasy utopia in which they think these cowards will be negotiated with. The people of the US need to stand with the President and have the guts to keep fighting, even if it means loss of life, or property on their part. They did that in WWII, they DIDNT do it with Vietnam, and they aren't doing it now. Why? Because Americans these days are selfish self centered dishonest lovers of themselves. When a country gets away from caring about its country and its people, and begin to sink into self-serving anarchy, then what is happening in the US is what will happen anywhere. Until that changes, countries will fall from within, and if the US continues down the path of trying to live in its fantasy utopia, it will fall, hard. B I disagree about the enemy being cowards. When you have a rifle, and the other guy has an armoured vehicle, standing up and facing him sounds very gung-ho but is in fact damned foolhardy. Just like in a ball game, you go with the players and resources that you've got, until such time as you have the ones you need for a "stand-up" fight. GET REAL. miki. |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
On Apr 21, 4:03 pm, Whatever wrote:
Telamon wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Slight Possibility?? It's common sense. The earth's climate is always changing. And we will adapt, as we have in the past. Do you think that our climate should always be like the climate in the 1950's or 60's and that it should be that way forever?? and that it was always like that in the past?? Like I said, what about the Medieval Warm Period when the world was warmer then now. Tell me what caused that. Or the Little Ice Age from approx. the 1400's to the mid 19th century. What caused that? How come back in the late sixties and seventies they were trying to scare us with visions of Global Cooling and another Ice Age??? Do you want to spend the Western World into the poor house for a few ppm of CO2? Kyoto even lets China and India off the hook, and allows us to continue CO2 production by purchasing credits. It will do nothing, and cost untold Hundreds of Billions and Trillions of dollars and destroy the economy of the western nations. And that is exactly what some people want to see happen. They want to see the West go down on it's knees. SOCIALISM WILL FINALLY BE TRIUMPHANT !! By the way, ever hear of Ice Ages? Our caveman ancestors survived the last ice age. And the polar bears survived the Medieval Warm Period. The climate will always change, get used to it. Cato |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
Cato wrote: On Apr 21, 4:03 pm, Whatever wrote: Telamon wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Slight Possibility?? It's common sense. The earth's climate is always changing. And we will adapt, as we have in the past. Do you think that our climate should always be like the climate in the 1950's or 60's and that it should be that way forever?? and that it was always like that in the past?? Like I said, what about the Medieval Warm Period when the world was warmer then now. Tell me what caused that. Or the Little Ice Age from approx. the 1400's to the mid 19th century. What caused that? How come back in the late sixties and seventies they were trying to scare us with visions of Global Cooling and another Ice Age??? Do you want to spend the Western World into the poor house for a few ppm of CO2? Kyoto even lets China and India off the hook, and allows us to continue CO2 production by purchasing credits. It will do nothing, and cost untold Hundreds of Billions and Trillions of dollars and destroy the economy of the western nations. And that is exactly what some people want to see happen. They want to see the West go down on it's knees. SOCIALISM WILL FINALLY BE TRIUMPHANT !! By the way, ever hear of Ice Ages? Our caveman ancestors survived the last ice age. And the polar bears survived the Medieval Warm Period. The climate will always change, get used to it. You'll never convince them, Cato. It's their new religion. |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Cato wrote:
So what the ****s wrong with my hating I.E.D.'s and asshole suicide bombers when ther're killing our boys and innocent people????????? Don't tell me that they don't bother you!!! Sure. But whether you like it or not, they are fighting to win for whatever their cause is. Their attitude is, "**** fair." And, frankly, that attitude wins wars and ultimately saves lives. The crap with exclusion zones and fighting these guys with one hand tied behind our back won't work. It may assuage our western consciences, but it won't work... unless some large portion of the populace fears that we will *stop* doing that. We didn't in VietNam, so while they were sticking bamboo shoots under fingernails of prisoners, we were worrying about exclusion zones. In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Eric F. Richards wrote:
In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" http://snipurl.com/1himr http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3608315.stm ================================================== = Almost half of the city's mosques have been destroyed after being targeted by US air and tank strikes," he added. http://english.aljazeera.net/English...ArchiveId=7581 ================================================== = http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0407-06.htm or: http://tinyurl.com/2jbk5j |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
On Apr 21, 11:26 am, "miki" wrote:
"Cato" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 21, 4:38 am, Tommy Tootles wrote: Cato wrote: Hell, I'm a dumbass canuck too. So our Canadian boys are over in Afghanistan fighting Taliban and Al Queda sickos, and doing a fine job, and helping build schools and hospitals, and handing out radios and candies, but they keep getting blown up by I.E.D's and asshole suicide bombers. How the hell do you fight that? Well, you don't. Ask the Russians. It took them ten years in Afghanistan to reach that same conclusion. We in the west seem to want "shock and awe", instant gratification. The folks over there don't mind dragging it out over *centuries*. The Shiites and Sunnis have been feuding since about 638 A.D. and we think a six month or year "surge" is going to resolve the issue? How dumb can W be? (don't answer--it's a rhetorical question). My oldest boy might be going over with the "Lincs & Winks" Best of luck to him! and my second oldest is thinking of signing up. Why???? I guess because serving in the Lincoln & Welland Regiment seems to be a family tradition going back a long, long way. Cato I am a WW2 veteran. I say it is time to set aside the family tradition. Stay home and fight the immigrant invasion, master-minded by the u-no-hooz. miki.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I am a WW2 veteran. I say it is time to set aside the family tradition. Stay home and fight the immigrant invasion, master-minded by the u-no-hooz. miki.- Hide quoted text - Well, you being a WW II vet, I have all due respect for you. God know our country owes you a hell of a lot. I will say that you are totally right about fighting the immigrant invasion. But I will say "illegal immigrant invasion" and the ones with criminal records in their own countries coming into our country. Both the U.S. and Canada have a big illegal immigrant problem. I agree with you on that. But as a few others have said here, there are also times when we have to go "over there". We have to "kill the snakes in their nest", and try to stop their spreading, no matter how much the whole thing stinks. So if you look at it that way, we have a war on two fronts, overseas, and right here at home. God help us. Cato |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
On Apr 21, 4:54 pm, Eric F. Richards wrote:
Cato wrote: So what the ****s wrong with my hating I.E.D.'s and asshole suicide bombers when ther're killing our boys and innocent people????????? Don't tell me that they don't bother you!!! Sure. But whether you like it or not, they are fighting to win for whatever their cause is. Their attitude is, "**** fair." And, frankly, that attitude wins wars and ultimately saves lives. The crap with exclusion zones and fighting these guys with one hand tied behind our back won't work. It may assuage our western consciences, but it won't work... unless some large portion of the populace fears that we will *stop* doing that. We didn't in VietNam, so while they were sticking bamboo shoots under fingernails of prisoners, we were worrying about exclusion zones. In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" The crap with exclusion zones and fighting these guys with one hand tied behind our back won't work. It may assuage our western consciences, but it won't work... unless some large portion of the populace fears that we will *stop* doing that. We didn't in VietNam, so while they were sticking bamboo shoots under fingernails of prisoners, we were worrying about exclusion zones. In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" I think we are maybe not talking about the same thing exactly. What I am talking about is that in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enemy has no feelings about innocent civilians. They will not hesitate to target innocent people and erase them from this world. I would like to think that we do not intentionally target civilian non-combatants. If we did, then we would be just as much murderous animals as the enemy that we fight. (( Only if some country fired nukes at our cities, or we had conclusive evidence that they about to fire them at us, ( example, North Korea) would I agree to taking out the country with massive retaliation on their cities.)) That is what I am talking about. Doing the best we can to take out the enemy, and leave the civilians unharmed as best we can. Sure there will be times were we fall down on that effort and some civilians will be killed accidentally, but I would like to think that we do our outmost to keep those innocent deaths to an absolute minimum. Cato |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
On Apr 21, 4:33 pm, dxAce wrote:
Cato wrote: On Apr 21, 4:03 pm, Whatever wrote: Telamon wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Slight Possibility?? It's common sense. The earth's climate is always changing. And we will adapt, as we have in the past. Do you think that our climate should always be like the climate in the 1950's or 60's and that it should be that way forever?? and that it was always like that in the past?? Like I said, what about the Medieval Warm Period when the world was warmer then now. Tell me what caused that. Or the Little Ice Age from approx. the 1400's to the mid 19th century. What caused that? How come back in the late sixties and seventies they were trying to scare us with visions of Global Cooling and another Ice Age??? Do you want to spend the Western World into the poor house for a few ppm of CO2? Kyoto even lets China and India off the hook, and allows us to continue CO2 production by purchasing credits. It will do nothing, and cost untold Hundreds of Billions and Trillions of dollars and destroy the economy of the western nations. And that is exactly what some people want to see happen. They want to see the West go down on it's knees. SOCIALISM WILL FINALLY BE TRIUMPHANT !! By the way, ever hear of Ice Ages? Our caveman ancestors survived the last ice age. And the polar bears survived the Medieval Warm Period. The climate will always change, get used to it. You'll never convince them, Cato. It's their new religion.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You'll never convince them, Cato. It's their new religion.- Ya, you're right. Most of them are "true believers" in their new faith. We used to call it being "brainwashed " years ago. Cato |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" Well..... If we have damn good dependable intelligence that certain mosques are being used as armories by the enemy, then that would, as far as I am concerned, remove those mosques from the protection classification of a religious building. Take 'em out. Cato |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Cato wrote:
I think we are maybe not talking about the same thing exactly. What I am talking about is that in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enemy has no feelings about innocent civilians. They will not hesitate to target innocent people and erase them from this world. I would like to think that we do not intentionally target civilian non-combatants. If we did, then we would be just as much murderous animals as the enemy that we fight. Unfortunately, our aim must be terrible. Bush himself, personally and on National TV, *admitted* to the deaths of 35,000 innocent civilians, a number on the very *low* end of the range. Many other organizations put the figure much higher. Maybe those "smart" bombs weren't. :-( Oh, by the way, read any of the books about the war--we *did* intentionally hit many civilian targets--power plants, sewage treatment plants and many other NON-military targets. Why do you think the country is in such a total shambles? There weren't *that* many military targets. One recent book that clearly documents this (with many references) is "Web of Deceit" by Lando. |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Brian O wrote:
Yeah, its cowardly. But that's the enemy we face. They are too cowardly to get a regular army and fight. But, as the US learned with Vietnam, there are ways to deal with gorillas. Huh? Please, tell me what we learned in Vietnam and how we dealt with guerrillas. The last newsreels I saw, we left with our tail between our legs and Saigon aint called Saigon any more. We should have learned that we *can't* fight people that just melt into the Vietnam jungle or the Baghdad urban "jungle" with conventional armies. Time is the only way to get to them. How much time do you think we need? Before you answer, please keep in mind that the Shiites and Sunnis have been feuding since about 638 A.D. Do you really think a year (or even a five year) "surge" will make any difference? Even if we did have a five year "surge" and went home after that, what do you think would happen in year six? That after *centuries* of feuding, they would start to play nice after a lousy, stinkin' 5 year surge? It eventually pays off. When they get tired of the killing before we do, then they will stop. Therefore, we HAVE to persevere, we CANNOT stop taking the war to them. And that is what we are doing in Iraq. Just what *are* we doing in Iraq? According to Bush on national TV, "no WMDs". According to Cheney on national TV, "no 9/11-Iraq connection". They finally decided the "reason" for the war was that "Saddam was a bad guy". Well, OK, but Saddam is long gone. About 70% of the American public now believes it is the wrong war in the wrong country for the wrong reason. Troops there are going house to house, every day, putting their lives on the line, to get these cowards. Why are they cowards? Just because they don't have B-52s and H-bombs? They are fighting the only way they can, to defend their country against what *they* consider to be occupiers, in the wrong country (THEIR country) for the wrong (or no) reason. (and please, before you jump all over me, I am just giving you *their* viewpoint. As a reference, please recall that in the last week or two, al Sadr said to stop killing Iraqi soldiers and police and concentrate on killing the occupiers). Finally, if your kid got killed by a "non-cowardly" fighter jet or machine gun, would he be any less dead than if killed by an IED? That's something the news doesn't tell you. They want you to think they are just standing around over there while a car bomber just drives up and blows them all up. That isn't what's happening. There is STILL a LOT of fighting going on over there. No foolin'. I don't know of anyone who doesn't think there isn't a "LOT of fighting going on over there". Just watch -any- newscast on -any- day of the week. That is exactly why the surge in the amount of troops is quelling the attacks for the most part. Again, huh? Some of the worst violence *ever* in Baghdad occurred *after* the surge started (and presumably, the "surge" is mainly in Baghdad). They NOW have enough to KEEP troops in place rather than just chase the cowards from house to house and back to the one they were in before. Time is the secret. That's why President Bush said this would be a LONG war. Again, HOW long do you suggest we "keep the troops in place"??? The Sunni/Shiite dispute has been going on for *centuries*. What do you think? 5 years? 10 years? A generation? Would even a generation make any difference compared to centuries? Because Americans these days are selfish self centered dishonest lovers of themselves. When a country gets away from caring about its country and its people, You are exactly right! It's all been Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. Unfortunately, this administration has spent little or no time addressing or caring about *domestic* issues that desperately need attention--less people having health care, less people having good jobs, more people below the poverty line since 2000. Until that changes, countries will fall from within, and if the US continues down the path of trying to live in its fantasy utopia, it will fall, hard. Sadly, I agree with your statement. Where we differ is that I lay most of the blame at the door step of the current greedy administration--do *everything* for big business like Big Oil, Haliburton and the Pharmaceuticals but let the old people in this country decide if they are going to buy their medicine or buy dog food for dinner. As you so aptly put it, "they have gotten away from caring about their people". |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Yeah...nuke the *******s.....all of them... On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:11:15 GMT, m II wrote: Eric F. Richards wrote: In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" http://snipurl.com/1himr http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3608315.stm ================================================= == Almost half of the city's mosques have been destroyed after being targeted by US air and tank strikes," he added. http://english.aljazeera.net/English...ArchiveId=7581 ================================================= == http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0407-06.htm or: http://tinyurl.com/2jbk5j |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Cato wrote:
I think we are maybe not talking about the same thing exactly. What I am talking about is that in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enemy has no feelings about innocent civilians. They will not hesitate to target innocent people and erase them from this world. That's right... I would like to think that we do not intentionally target civilian non-combatants. Generally, that's true... If we did, then we would be just as much murderous animals as the enemy that we fight. ....and I agree... (( Only if some country fired nukes at our cities, or we had conclusive evidence that they about to fire them at us, ( example, North Korea) would I agree to taking out the country with massive retaliation on their cities.)) But that's not what I'm talking about. The Powell Doctrine was pretty clear: Go in with overwhelming force, have a clear definition of the job from beginning to end, do the job with overwhelming military force, and get out. We went in on the cheap, with no reasonable answer to how to deal with the aftermath of taking the Iraqi government out, and neglected since then the escalating problems. We have also treated, for example, al Sadr to continue to function as a corrosive influence over there. A sniper team could have taken him out and I think we would have been better off with him as a potential martyr than as an active cancer. But, because he is a self-described "cleric" (as opposed to his father, who really was an expert on Islam), and hid in a mosque, we didn't touch him. He had no problem with taking us out. That is what I am talking about. Doing the best we can to take out the enemy, and leave the civilians unharmed as best we can. Sure there will be times were we fall down on that effort and some civilians will be killed accidentally, but I would like to think that we do our outmost to keep those innocent deaths to an absolute minimum. Cato What I read you talking about is that they don't fight fair. War isn't about fair, war is about winning control through violence. That's why we souldn't play with it, but treat it as soberly and seriously, something our American administration hasn't been willing to do. Screw fair. They do, and we should. I'm not talking about paving over the surface of Iraq and killing everyone, but we sure as hell shouldn't be afraid to fight the insurgents, al-Quida, the Taliban, etc on the grounds that they choose to hide from us. -- Eric F. Richards "Don't destroy the Earth! That's where I keep all of my stuff!" - Squidd on www.fark.com |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Cato wrote:
In Iraq, we don't attack mosques used as armories because we want to respect the mosque and Islam. How is using it as an armory "respecting Islam?" Well..... If we have damn good dependable intelligence that certain mosques are being used as armories by the enemy, then that would, as far as I am concerned, remove those mosques from the protection classification of a religious building. Take 'em out. Cato When your son comes back from Afghanistan, if he does end up going, talk to him about this. Or find an American vet from Iraq. -- Eric F. Richards "The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed." - Dilbert |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
In article uLwWh.1557$Zm.901@trndny03, Whatever
wrote: Telamon wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win. What part of "man does not influence the climate" do you not understand? The only way to stop generating CO2 by our economy is to kill it and you would have to get every other country to kill its economy or it is for nothing. We all go back to the stone age globally. It is not going to happen. Personally you can do your part by holding your breath. Nothing wrong with being energy efficient and re-cycling waste so as to not pollute but it is not going to change the climate. You realize that trees and other plants generate particulate matter right? Chances are scientists will figure out that all the cars sucking in air and burning the natural particulate matter in it through filters and catalytic converters put out less particulate than went into the engine cleaning the air. Cleaner air next to the ground will let more sunlight hit it warming the earth raising temperatures in the lower atmosphere. How's that for a theory? Makes more sense than the global warming crowd makes. So go out there and drive an old car that generates more pollution and particulate matter into the air to fight global warming like Al Gore does. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
On Apr 21, 7:22 pm, Eric F. Richards wrote:
Cato wrote: I think we are maybe not talking about the same thing exactly. What I am talking about is that in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enemy has no feelings about innocent civilians. They will not hesitate to target innocent people and erase them from this world. That's right... I would like to think that we do not intentionally target civilian non-combatants. Generally, that's true... If we did, then we would be just as much murderous animals as the enemy that we fight. ...and I agree... (( Only if some country fired nukes at our cities, or we had conclusive evidence that they about to fire them at us, ( example, North Korea) would I agree to taking out the country with massive retaliation on their cities.)) But that's not what I'm talking about. The Powell Doctrine was pretty clear: Go in with overwhelming force, have a clear definition of the job from beginning to end, do the job with overwhelming military force, and get out. We went in on the cheap, with no reasonable answer to how to deal with the aftermath of taking the Iraqi government out, and neglected since then the escalating problems. We have also treated, for example, al Sadr to continue to function as a corrosive influence over there. A sniper team could have taken him out and I think we would have been better off with him as a potential martyr than as an active cancer. But, because he is a self-described "cleric" (as opposed to his father, who really was an expert on Islam), and hid in a mosque, we didn't touch him. He had no problem with taking us out. That is what I am talking about. Doing the best we can to take out the enemy, and leave the civilians unharmed as best we can. Sure there will be times were we fall down on that effort and some civilians will be killed accidentally, but I would like to think that we do our outmost to keep those innocent deaths to an absolute minimum. Cato What I read you talking about is that they don't fight fair. War isn't about fair, war is about winning control through violence. That's why we souldn't play with it, but treat it as soberly and seriously, something our American administration hasn't been willing to do. Screw fair. They do, and we should. I'm not talking about paving over the surface of Iraq and killing everyone, but we sure as hell shouldn't be afraid to fight the insurgents, al-Quida, the Taliban, etc on the grounds that they choose to hide from us. -- Eric F. Richards "Don't destroy the Earth! That's where I keep all of my stuff!" - Squidd onwww.fark.com Eric F. Richards Wrote: I'm not talking about paving over the surface of Iraq and killing everyone, but we sure as hell shouldn't be afraid to fight the insurgents, al-Quida, the Taliban, etc on the grounds that they choose to hide from us. Cato: I agree. I don't think we are really that far into disagreement. We shouldn't be afraid to fight them on the ground of their choosing. The type of war we are fighting over there is a hell of a lot different the most of the large conventional wars of the past. But we have to remember the Liberal Eastern Establishment and what they did during 'Nam through the media. Especially after the My Lai affair in '68. The liberal media is always looking for ways to weaken the resolve of the U.S. people. And not just in the U.S., but up here in Canada too. Whenever our Canadian forces go in, like Cyprus, or the Balkan's affair, (Thank God the military kept that one under wraps pretty good from our liberal media.) or Somalia in Africa, the leftwing media looks for ways to turn the people against the job that our soldiers are doing in those parts of the world, and put heavy presuure on the politicians to pull out and run. They will look at any excuse to hurt the military. I mentioned My Lai. Well we had an incident in Somalia in '95 that destroyed the Canadian Airborne Regiment. The regiment was disbanded after the media did a big smear job on them. All because of the action of two of the soldiers in the torture and beating death of a Somalian. He was one of a couple of Somalians that had slipped past our razor wire at night and was stealing regiment supplies. That one incident was the end of the regiment. A great regiment destroyed by the actions of two soldiers, and of course "The Liberal Media" in Canada. The left held parties to celebrate the disbanding of the Canadian Airborne Regiment. They saw it as a huge success, in their "war" against us. The liberal media will stop at nothing in their attempts to weaken us in the face of the citizens of our countries. I guess what I am saying is, we have to be careful that we don't set ourselves up as a bigger target for the liberal extablishment and their socialist buddies. Because everytime we do something over there that looks like we're hurting or killing civilians the media will do their utmost to turn our fellow American or Canadian citizens against us. My God. I don't like the situation any more then you do. It ****'n stinks. Pardon the language. I agree, that the best way is to go in with overwhelming massive force and end it quickly. (Why did I just think of Patton?, Always did admire that great American General.) Best regards, Cato |
Hundreds of Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack
On Apr 19, 10:47 am, Ian Jackson
wrote: In message .com, ve3... writes A CBC News report at 10 pm stated that hundreds of fishing boats and a Coast Guard vessel were caught in a giant pack ice field off the east cost of Newfoundland. Although most marine communication is VHF , there may be some HF communications going on. I am out of range, but maybe some closer could have a listen to Coast Guard and fish boat frequencies. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""" CANADIAN COAST GUARD HF FREQUENCIES AM frequencies: 2182, 2598, 2582, 518 SSB frequencies: 4125 2300 utc - 1100 6215 continuous 8291 continuous 12290 1100 utc - 2300 |
(OT) : Al Gore Lied - "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
On Apr 21, 9:24 pm, Whatever wrote:
Telamon wrote: In article uLwWh.1557$Zm.901@trndny03, Whatever wrote: Telamon wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. We do not control the atmospheric gas balance or temperature globally. We do control it locally such as creating heat islands around cities for example but the over all climate picture is not determined by mans activity. There are many temperature cycles that can be seen over time. We may be at the end of a 20 year or middle of a 40 year warming trend. The average temperature may start to decline now or may increase another 0.6 degC yet then decline. Nobody knows what will happen yet because we do not have reliable temperature data beyond 150 years and global climate models are a joke so speculate all you want about what the future holds. Inconveniently, the single biggest individual energy user and propaganda provider in the USA is Al Gore. So you're willing to bet your future and that of future generations on the slight possibility that you're right. By the time we know for sure, it would be too late to act. If it turns out you're right, we will still have cleaned up the environment in an effort to stop global warming, even if it doesn't happen. Either way we win. What part of "man does not influence the climate" do you not understand? I understand the part that's wrong. The only way to stop generating CO2 by our economy is to kill it and you would have to get every other country to kill its economy or it is for nothing. We all go back to the stone age globally. It is not going to happen. That's a strawman. No one proposes the complete cessation of CO2 production to curtail global warming. It's only necessary to reduce CO2 to the point where global warming stabilizes or hopefully reverses to a certain extent. Personally you can do your part by holding your breath. I do, between breaths. Nothing wrong with being energy efficient and re-cycling waste so as to not pollute but it is not going to change the climate. You realize that trees and other plants generate particulate matter right? That's the Ronald Reagan defense. He thought trees caused more pollution than cars. Trees produce 02 which is essential to life on the planet. O2 is not 'particulate matter'. Cars produce gases and particles which are harmful to the environment. Chances are scientists will figure out that all the cars sucking in air and burning the natural particulate matter in it through filters and catalytic converters put out less particulate than went into the engine cleaning the air. Cleaner air next to the ground will let more sunlight hit it warming the earth raising temperatures in the lower atmosphere. How's that for a theory? Chances are? You seem to be a gambler when it comes to the future of humanity. Are you doing the research on that theory? Makes more sense than the global warming crowd makes. So go out there and drive an old car that generates more pollution and particulate matter into the air to fight global warming like Al Gore does. - So where did you get your climatology degree WHATEVER ? Climatology Degree ? What Ever ! Got Mind from an All American Box-of-Cracker-Jacks ! ! ! ~ RHF And.. just where did you get yours a Forture Cookie ? WHATEVER - More importantly since Al Gore has NO Scientific Degree or Real Climatology Credentials : Then Why Do You Believe anything that he says at all ? ? ? -Blind-Faith- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore The Al Gore "Global Warming" Dog-and-Pony Show http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Warming presented by the Master of Pseudo-Science http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience Mystifying the Mindless with Scientific Mumbo Jumbo and Fear to Create Hysteria and Receive Grants and Funding. AL GORE LIED - "The Great Global Warming Swindle" http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31355859226455 |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
On 21 Apr 2007 16:27:24 -0700, Cato wrote:
Like I said, what about the Medieval Warm Period when the world was warmer then now. Tell me what caused that. Or the Little Ice Age from approx. the 1400's to the mid 19th century. What caused that? 2.3.3 Was there a ''Little Ice Age'' and a ''Medieval Warm Period''? The terms ''Little Ice Age'' and ''Medieval Warm Period'' have been used to describe two past climate epochs in Europe and neighbouring regions during roughly the 17th to 19th and 11th to 14th centuries, respectively. The timing, however, of these cold and warm periods has recently been demonstrated to vary geographically over the globe in a considerable way... http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/070.htm |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:42:05 -0700, Telamon
wrote: The only way to stop generating CO2 by our economy is to kill it and you would have to get every other country to kill its economy or it is for nothing. We all go back to the stone age globally. It is not going to happen. It will only be an improvement over the joke we call ''civilization''. |
(OT) : Al Gore Lied - "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
RHF wrote:
Got Mind from an All American Box-of-Cracker-Jacks ! ! ! ~ RHF I'm sure you did. By all appearances, so did your cohorts. mike |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
In article ,
David wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:42:05 -0700, Telamon wrote: The only way to stop generating CO2 by our economy is to kill it and you would have to get every other country to kill its economy or it is for nothing. We all go back to the stone age globally. It is not going to happen. It will only be an improvement over the joke we call ''civilization''. Really? I'm not ready to go back to the stone age. Feel free to go live in a cave without running water or electricity. I guess you won't be posting here anymore. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
I am fixin to put my big bra on and get my Vietnam Medal and pin it on
my bra. cuhulin |
(OT) : M II - It Ain't Nice - It's Hell - It's Called War
Cato wrote:
No reason to destroy the Canadian Airborne Regiment. That assignment was the last chance they had to redeem themselves. Some good reading he ============================================== In many cases, those outside of the Regiment saw the Airborne as a reform school, if not a dumping ground. Many of the problems which eventually led to the disbandment of the Canadian Airborne Regiment are rooted in the demise of the Airborne's substantive, vice perceived, status. http://www.commando.org/ab-elite.php ============================================== |
Fishing Boats Caught in Ice Pack and Climate Change
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:22:44 -0700, Telamon
wrote: In article , David wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:42:05 -0700, Telamon wrote: The only way to stop generating CO2 by our economy is to kill it and you would have to get every other country to kill its economy or it is for nothing. We all go back to the stone age globally. It is not going to happen. It will only be an improvement over the joke we call ''civilization''. Really? I'm not ready to go back to the stone age. Feel free to go live in a cave without running water or electricity. I guess you won't be posting here anymore. This pretty much has summed-up my take on the matter for the past 39 years. Me an' Jimi knew all along. ______________________ Up From The Skies (Exp) Written by Jimi Hendrix I just want to talk to you. I won't uh, do you no harm, I just want to know about your different lives, on this here people farm. I heard some of you got your families, living in cages tall & cold, And some just stay there and dust away, past the age of old. Is this true? Please let me talk to you. I just wanna know about, the rooms behind your minds, Do I see a vacuum there, or am I going blind? Or is it just remains from vibrations and echoes long ago, Things like 'Love the World' and 'Let your fancy flow', Is this true? Please let me talk to you. Let me talk to you. I have lived here before, the days of ice, And of course this is why I'm so concerned, And I come back to find the stars misplaced and the smell of a world that has burned. The smell of a world that has burned. Well, maybe, maybe it's just a change of climate. I can dig it, I can dig it baby, I just want to see. So where do I purchase my ticket, I would just like to have a ringside seat, I want to know about the new Mother Earth, I want to hear and see everything, I want to hear and see everything, I want to hear and see everything. Aw, shucks, If my daddy could see me now. |
(OT) : On April/Avril 21 - Let's Each American Say SomethingGo...
|
(OT) : On April/Avril 21 - Let's Each American Say Something Go...
Some Facts About Air Pollution
Annual Air pollution deaths : Canada 5, 900 USA 70,000 Ontario 1,800 World 4,600,000 Europe 310,000 France+Austria+switzerland 40,000 Sources: BBC, Lancet, CMA, Wikipedia Toronto had 1 smog day in 1993 it had 48 smog days in 2005 |
(OT) : Al Gore Lied - "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
www.devilfinder.com Photo al gore as a boy in Washington D.C.
About six years ago,somebody at www.lucianne.com posted a photo of al ''Hot Air'' gore when he was a boy and was living in a fancy big hotel in D.C. In the photo,he looks just like a rich spoiled brat.The difference between then and now is he is a big fat rich spoiled brat. I guess that photo is still on the internet somewhere. cuhulin |
(OT) : Al Gore Lied - "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
In article ,
"][ce" wrote: On 22 Apr 2007 04:00:49 -0700, RHF wrote: Anyone with even half a brain understands that mans contribution to various gas balance in the atmosphere is a drop in the bucket compared to natural processes that control it. Not if you consider coal burning power plants, which are by far the biggest polluters. Power plants? Nut case. Plonk -- Telamon Ventura, California |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:02 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com