OT, I'll be Damned
 

On Oct 19, 9:19 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:



On Oct 13, 1:43 am, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 12, 2:16 am, "Burr" wrote:
Maybe I should have voted for the SOB!!!!

from CNN
-- Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the U.N.'s climate change
panel
win
the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Details soon.

While it's certainly open to debate whether global warming falls under
the purview of a peace prize, there's no question that once it's
decided that the prize goes for that, Albert Gore Jr. is deserving of
it.

The idea that global warming is liberal bias is preposterous. Global
warming is occurring, and the majority of that warming is
anthropogenic, and this is the consensus of climate scientists. None
of this is controversial in scientific circles, or at least no more
controversial than most generally-accepted theories.

First off there is no proof that man is responsible for climate change.

There is *overwhelming* scientific evidence to this effect. Where
have you been?

I'm sorry for being so blunt, but your statement is completely
contrary to fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no evidence. Get a
clue, mans contribution is insignificant compared to the processes in
nature that add and subtract the CO2 levels.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

There is conclusive evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

You can choose to ignore what science says, but you cannot claim that
scientific opinion says something other than what it does.
Humans are causing the majority of recent warming. That is the state
of current best scientific knowledge.
This is not opinion. It is documented fact.

OT, I'll be Damned
 

On Oct 20, 11:34 pm, Ross Archer wrote:
On Oct 19, 9:19 pm, Telamon





wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 13, 1:43 am, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 12, 2:16 am, "Burr" wrote:
Maybe I should have voted for the SOB!!!!

from CNN
-- Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the U.N.'s climate change
panel
win
the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Details soon.

While it's certainly open to debate whether global warming falls under
the purview of a peace prize, there's no question that once it's
decided that the prize goes for that, Albert Gore Jr. is deserving of
it.

The idea that global warming is liberal bias is preposterous. Global
warming is occurring, and the majority of that warming is
anthropogenic, and this is the consensus of climate scientists. None
of this is controversial in scientific circles, or at least no more
controversial than most generally-accepted theories.

First off there is no proof that man is responsible for climate change.

There is *overwhelming* scientific evidence to this effect. Where
have you been?

I'm sorry for being so blunt, but your statement is completely
contrary to fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no evidence. Get a
clue, mans contribution is insignificant compared to the processes in
nature that add and subtract the CO2 levels.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

There is conclusive evidence.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

- You can choose to ignore what science says,
- but you cannot claim that scientific opinion
- says something other than what it does.
- Humans are causing the majority of recent warming.
- That is the state of current best scientific knowledge.
- This is not opinion. It is documented fact.


RA - DUH ! - Scientific 'Opinion(s)' is NOT
Indisputable Incontrivertable Scientific Fact [.]

Documenting a Group of Like 'Opinions'
Does Not Make These 'Opinions' Facts.

and thems is the facts ~ rhf

OT, I'll be Damned
 

Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 19, 9:19 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:



On Oct 13, 1:43 am, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 12, 2:16 am, "Burr" wrote:
Maybe I should have voted for the SOB!!!!

from CNN
-- Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the U.N.'s climate change
panel
win
the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Details soon.

While it's certainly open to debate whether global warming falls under
the purview of a peace prize, there's no question that once it's
decided that the prize goes for that, Albert Gore Jr. is deserving of
it.

The idea that global warming is liberal bias is preposterous. Global
warming is occurring, and the majority of that warming is
anthropogenic, and this is the consensus of climate scientists. None
of this is controversial in scientific circles, or at least no more
controversial than most generally-accepted theories.

First off there is no proof that man is responsible for climate change.

There is *overwhelming* scientific evidence to this effect. Where
have you been?

I'm sorry for being so blunt, but your statement is completely
contrary to fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no evidence. Get a
clue, mans contribution is insignificant compared to the processes in
nature that add and subtract the CO2 levels.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

There is conclusive evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

You can choose to ignore what science says, but you cannot claim that
scientific opinion says something other than what it does.
Humans are causing the majority of recent warming. That is the state
of current best scientific knowledge.
This is not opinion. It is documented fact.

Hogwash!

OT, I'll be Damned
 

In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 19, 2:58 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article .com,
Ross Archer wrote:



On Oct 13, 6:39 pm, wrote:
www.devilfinder.com Scandals of Al Gore

Be sure to scroll down and click on the softwar.net site at the
devilfinder thingy.
(Nobel peace prize my arse! Nowadays only Morons and Idiots win the
Nobel prize,,,,, Gore,Arafat,Jimmah Carter, etc)

Solar Flares and Volcanos (do some research on Solar Flares and
Volcanos) (Mars is warming up too) contribute far more to global warming
than humans ever have, and there is the Van Oort Cloud too.On a scale of
0 to whatever, humans have contrbuted almost Zero to global warming.Rest
assured though, when this spate of global warming is done with, there
will be global cooling.Back in the 1950s and 1960s those scientist were
harping about an ice age is over the horizon.
cuhulin

The thing is, the global cooling part was never generally accepted and
was speculative.

Snip

Let me put your mind at ease. The human contribution to atmospheric CO2
is in the 1% to 2% range compared to natural processes that add and
subtract. No brainer don't you think?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

National and international science academies and professional
societies have assessed the current scientific opinion on climate
change, in particular recent global warming. These assessments have
largely followed or endorsed the IPCC position that "An increasing
body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and
other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger
evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is
attributable to human activities".[1]

This page documents scientific opinion as given by synthesis reports,
scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys
of opinion among climate scientists. It does not document the views of
individual scientists or self-selected lists of individuals such as
petitions.

MOST OF THE WARMING OBSERVED OVER THE LAST 50 YEARS IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO
HUMAN ACTIVITIES.

I'm glad you know so much better than actual scientists.

Pay attention please. The only scientific body making the incredibly
weak claim is the one at the UN. That body is more political than
scientific.

Now wake up if you are able.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

OT, I'll be Damned
 

In article .com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 19, 9:19 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:



On Oct 13, 1:43 am, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 12, 2:16 am, "Burr" wrote:
Maybe I should have voted for the SOB!!!!

from CNN -- Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the
U.N.'s climate change panel win the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
Details soon.

While it's certainly open to debate whether global warming
falls under the purview of a peace prize, there's no question
that once it's decided that the prize goes for that, Albert
Gore Jr. is deserving of it.

The idea that global warming is liberal bias is preposterous.
Global warming is occurring, and the majority of that
warming is anthropogenic, and this is the consensus of
climate scientists. None of this is controversial in
scientific circles, or at least no more controversial than
most generally-accepted theories.

First off there is no proof that man is responsible for climate
change.

There is *overwhelming* scientific evidence to this effect.
Where have you been?

I'm sorry for being so blunt, but your statement is completely
contrary to fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no evidence.
Get a clue, mans contribution is insignificant compared to the
processes in nature that add and subtract the CO2 levels.

-- Telamon Ventura, California

There is conclusive evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

You can choose to ignore what science says, but you cannot claim that
scientific opinion says something other than what it does. Humans are
causing the majority of recent warming. That is the state of current
best scientific knowledge. This is not opinion. It is documented
fact.

There is nothing about this that concludes that the current warming
trend is due to mankind's activities. Mankind could disappear off the
face of the earth tomorrow and the weather or climate would not change.

Besides the fact that man's activities are easily 2% how do you think
it is possible that mankind is causing climate change? You realize
there are many natural processes that add and subtract CO2 from the
atmosphere that control the gas balance in the atmosphere. At best man
can make temporary changes in a small area but that's about it.

Obviously you have no appreciation for the scale of the weather and the
climate.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

OT, I'll be Damned
 

In article ,
dxAce wrote:

Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 19, 9:19 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:



On Oct 13, 1:43 am, Telamon
wrote:
In article . com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 12, 2:16 am, "Burr" wrote:
Maybe I should have voted for the SOB!!!!

from CNN -- Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the
U.N.'s climate change panel win the 2007 Nobel Peace
Prize. Details soon.

While it's certainly open to debate whether global warming
falls under the purview of a peace prize, there's no
question that once it's decided that the prize goes for
that, Albert Gore Jr. is deserving of it.

The idea that global warming is liberal bias is
preposterous. Global warming is occurring, and the
majority of that warming is anthropogenic, and this is the
consensus of climate scientists. None of this is
controversial in scientific circles, or at least no more
controversial than most generally-accepted theories.

First off there is no proof that man is responsible for
climate change.

There is *overwhelming* scientific evidence to this effect.
Where have you been?

I'm sorry for being so blunt, but your statement is completely
contrary to fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no evidence.
Get a clue, mans contribution is insignificant compared to the
processes in nature that add and subtract the CO2 levels.

-- Telamon Ventura, California

There is conclusive evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

You can choose to ignore what science says, but you cannot claim
that scientific opinion says something other than what it does.
Humans are causing the majority of recent warming. That is the
state of current best scientific knowledge. This is not opinion.
It is documented fact.

Hogwash!

It a religion now. No stopping it.

I see a big problem that is getting worse. People that do not understand
science making outrageous claims get a following.

Witness the retard that was posting here claiming that the towers fell
faster than they should have because there was controlled demolition
that brought them down. Objects fall at a certain rate determined by the
acceleration of gravity. Air friction is the only factor that slows them
down. This was figured out in the middle ages. And then the retard
doesn't think that the fuel fire in the tower acting as a chimney could
not reach temperatures to melt the steel infrastructure so to this they
need a conspiracy theory for it to make sense to them.

It looks like a sickness to me, kind of a adult AADD where someone has
figured out how to program these hapless individuals.

This stupefied behavior used to be confined to politics and social
issues which encompass what people want and statistics which can prove
whatever you want but now has reached into science and recent events.
Michael Moor, Alex Jones, Al Gore, and other loons lead the way with
their improbable and unworkable ideas and still get a following of AADD
individuals.

I was listening to Alex Jones the other night on WWCR and I thought he
was going to breakdown on the spot. He was just screaming into the mike.
Toward the end of the rant it was no words just screaming. Then there
was a commercial break and afterward when he was back on he sounded
perfectly normal. The guy is a natural actor and knows how to manipulate
the audience. He sure had me going for a few minutes.

Priceless entertainment.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

OT, I'll be Damned
 

www.devilfinder.com How much global warming is caused by the Sun and
Volcanos.

How do those Kooks and Wackos out there explain previous global warmings
and ice ages that happened many times before Humans ever showed up on
Planet Earth millions of years ago? How do they explain that Mars is
heating up a little bit too?
cuhulin

OT, I'll be Damned
 

On Oct 20, 1:51 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,



David wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:58:54 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article .com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 13, 6:39 pm, wrote:
www.devilfinder.com Scandals of Al Gore

Be sure to scroll down and click on the softwar.net site at the
devilfinder thingy.
(Nobel peace prize my arse! Nowadays only Morons and Idiots win the
Nobel prize,,,,, Gore,Arafat,Jimmah Carter, etc)

Solar Flares and Volcanos (do some research on Solar Flares and
Volcanos) (Mars is warming up too) contribute far more to global warming
than humans ever have, and there is the Van Oort Cloud too.On a scale of
0 to whatever, humans have contrbuted almost Zero to global warming.Rest
assured though, when this spate of global warming is done with, there
will be global cooling.Back in the 1950s and 1960s those scientist were
harping about an ice age is over the horizon.
cuhulin

The thing is, the global cooling part was never generally accepted and
was speculative.

Snip

Let me put your mind at ease. The human contribution to atmospheric CO2
is in the 1% to 2% range compared to natural processes that add and
subtract. No brainer don't you think?

You're still going to be under water soon.

If the sea level goes up three feet worst case I'll still be 7 feet
above sea level. Thanks anyway for your concern.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California


Think Pipelines

electrical transmission grids

Water supplies

Highways ( used to transport your Beer )

Think outside the Box . .

sea level goes up three feet..

Do the math . .

OT, I'll be Damned
 

" wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:51 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,



David wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:58:54 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article .com,
Ross Archer wrote:

On Oct 13, 6:39 pm, wrote:
www.devilfinder.com Scandals of Al Gore

Be sure to scroll down and click on the softwar.net site at the
devilfinder thingy.
(Nobel peace prize my arse! Nowadays only Morons and Idiots win the
Nobel prize,,,,, Gore,Arafat,Jimmah Carter, etc)

Solar Flares and Volcanos (do some research on Solar Flares and
Volcanos) (Mars is warming up too) contribute far more to global warming
than humans ever have, and there is the Van Oort Cloud too.On a scale of
0 to whatever, humans have contrbuted almost Zero to global warming.Rest
assured though, when this spate of global warming is done with, there
will be global cooling.Back in the 1950s and 1960s those scientist were
harping about an ice age is over the horizon.
cuhulin

The thing is, the global cooling part was never generally accepted and
was speculative.

Snip

Let me put your mind at ease. The human contribution to atmospheric CO2
is in the 1% to 2% range compared to natural processes that add and
subtract. No brainer don't you think?

You're still going to be under water soon.

If the sea level goes up three feet worst case I'll still be 7 feet
above sea level. Thanks anyway for your concern.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Think Pipelines

electrical transmission grids

Water supplies

Highways ( used to transport your Beer )

Think outside the Box . .

sea level goes up three feet..

Do the math . .

Take your meds. .

OT, I'll be Damned
 

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:24:05 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

Pay attention please. The only scientific body making the incredibly
weak claim is the one at the UN. That body is more political than
scientific.

Now wake up if you are able.

And the AAAS. Are they political as well?

"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate
change caused by human activities
is occurring now, and it is a growing
threat to society. Accumulating data from
across the globe reveal a wide array of
effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization
of major ice sheets, increases in
extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts
in species ranges, and more. The pace of
change and the evidence of harm have
increased markedly over the last five
years. The time to control greenhouse
gas emissions is now.
The atmospheric concentration of
carbon dioxide, a critical greenhouse
gas, is higher than it has been for at
least 650,000 years. The average temperature
of the Earth is heading for
levels not experienced for millions of
years. Scientific predictions of the
impacts of increasing atmospheric concentrations
of greenhouse gases from
fossil fuels and deforestation match
observed changes. As expected, intensification
of droughts, heat waves, floods,
wildfires, and severe storms is occurring,
with a mounting toll on vulnerable
ecosystems and societies. These events
are early warning signs of even more
devastating damage to come, some of
which will be irreversible.
Delaying action to address climate
change will increase the environmental
and societal consequences as well as
the costs. The longer we wait to tackle
climate change, the harder and more
expensive the task will be.
History provides many examples of
society confronting grave threats by
mobilizing knowledge and promoting
innovation. We need an aggressive
research, development and deployment
effort to transform the existing and
future energy systems of the world away
from technologies that emit greenhouse
gases. Developing clean energy technologies
will provide economic opportunities
and ensure future energy
supplies.
In addition to rapidly reducing greenhouse
gas emissions, it is essential that
we develop strategies to adapt to
ongoing changes and make communities
more resilient to future changes.
The growing torrent of information presents
a clear message: we are already
experiencing global climate change. It is
time to muster the political will for concerted
action. Stronger leadership at all
levels is needed. The time is now. We
must rise to the challenge. We owe this
to future generations."
-American Association for the Advancement of Science