|
"Tom" wrote in message ... This entire conversation needs to be prefaced with the fact that 99% of scientists doing studies receive their sole source of income from goverment grants and public donations. Most of their time is actually spent studying methods of getting more money to continue their research. And are only looking for statistics to support their conclusion. Or the conclusion they were given by the government to find the statistics to. HTH STeve |
Tom wrote:
Lew Hartswick wrote: Tom wrote: Polar ice caps? Antartica has most of its ice landbased, it melts, 13 ft ASL isn't going to save you.. Tom And a few, even quite a few, degrees is not going to melt much of the antartic ice cap with the summer temps that exist there. All the ice shelfs in that part of the world are also floating. ...lew... So you say...based on what? Tom For the first, the melting point of ice. For the second the definition of an ice shelf. ...lew... |
In article 6wJRd.106694$mt.14648@fed1read03, SteveB
wrote: And we shouldn't forget that the end of the world has been prophesied, and that there is something/someone that will save us all. In an earlier post I listed 10 things one should do in order to have a better chance at surviving disaster. Number 10 was "Learn to distinguish truth from bull****." This is one of those instances. -Frank -- Here's some of my work: http://www.franksknives.com |
Lucifer's Hammer is an entertaining speculation where a guy figures out that
the earth is about to get hit, packs a bunch of stuff in a vehicle, and tries to get out. Mayhem ensues... It triggered a lot of thought as to what I would take, what vehicle I would want, where I would go, and so on... As the book goes on, there is total societal collapse, wars and violence, and attempts to recover. I found it very entertaining... |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:01:57 -0600, Tom
wrote: Eric R Snow wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 17:49:07 -0600, Tom wrote: This entire conversation needs to be prefaced with the fact that 99% of scientists doing studies receive their sole source of income from goverment grants and public donations. Most of their time is actually spent studying methods of getting more money to continue their research. And then, they all gather at scientific conferences to divvy up the topics of study for the next several years......................."Here, you taking global warming for 15 years, we'll do ice age. In 10 years Joe's groups can have global warming, we'll take Ice age, and you can have earthquakes........................" All the while, Bills group is doing great at securing funding so they will continue with that for the next 20 years......... Tom =---- Tom, Care to back up your above statements with documentation? Or are you just trying to make a point? And even if we assume everything you said above is true, are you implying that the scientists are dishonest? ERS All I'm saying is that when they were in scientist school they did very well in "Which side your bread's buttered 101". I believe they are honestly trying to collect money while they honestly study opposing opinions. One of my cousins is a "scientist", he's been attending college since graduating high school........22 years ago. Goverment grants fund his continued education. Tom ----== 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 =---- Tom, You're sample of one sure is impressive... ERS |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show Gunner
wrote back on Sat, 19 Feb 2005 08:46:13 GMT in rec.crafts.metalworking : Our current understanding of the long-term climate cycles shows that for the past 800,000 years, periods of approximately 100,000 years’ duration, called Ice Ages, have been interrupted by periods of approximately 10,000 years, known as Interglacials. (We are now about 10,500 years into the present Interglacial.) Hmmm, so all the greenhouse gasses which humanity has exhausted into the atmosphere might actually be having a beneficial impact on the climate? I am reminded of the book "Fallen Angels" - the background of which was a sweep to power of Green Socialists, who adopted Kyoto which precipitated a new Ice Age. One of the best lines in that was "Peasants always believe in magic." tschus pyotr -- pyotr filipivich. as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with." |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 21:31:46 -0800, "SteveB"
wrote: "Tom" wrote in message ... This entire conversation needs to be prefaced with the fact that 99% of scientists doing studies receive their sole source of income from goverment grants and public donations. Most of their time is actually spent studying methods of getting more money to continue their research. And are only looking for statistics to support their conclusion. Or the conclusion they were given by the government to find the statistics to. HTH STeve Or the conclusion desired by the folks who funded them. Gunner It's better to be a red person in a blue state than a blue person in a red state. As a red person, if your blue neighbors turn into a mob at least you have a gun to protect yourself. As a blue person, your only hope is to appease the red mob with herbal tea and marinated tofu. (Phil Garding) |
In article ,
Frank J Warner wrote: I don't know about global warming. I'm inclined to believe the scientists who study the subject, and most of them are concerned about something to some degree great or small depending on who you listen to. Just like most of you are very good at what you do, so are they, and for that reason alone we should probably be listening, at least a little. As someone who works at a university here in the US and has occasion to deal with the professors, I can tell you that they are just like everyone else. There are some that really know their stuff, then there are those that don't. I have seen some real doozies out there... The thing that I have noticed is the expert in the field, the guy who really honestly is the best of the best, you will probably never recognize unless you are deep in the literature of the field. The guys that are on every radio/TV interview, the guys who write books with a title that is 500 words or less and your next door neighbor has heard about, usually aren't the best. Now there obviously is crossover, but for the most part, what I have seen is that the people with the opinions that I would trust aren't running off to CNN with a press release and they won't comment on the story that just appeared on CNN without looking at the whole report and all the data. The problem is that the lesser "experts" may not have done a good job in the data collection, analysis, assumptions, etc. Get a sensational result, fire off a press release, the media gets it and makes a "good story" out of it, the people read it and yell "Do soooooomething..." to the politicians who begin to legislate away. Meanwhile, the report is peer reviewed, and modified, but no press release is ever sent out that says "Whoops, we forgot to take into account "foo"... never mind." unless it is an asteroid making a fly-by. So, is global warming happening? The raw data seems to indicate that things are getting warmer. Is it due to us or some natural trend? I don't know. I am sure that we are having some influence, but how big, no idea. I am sure that there is a natural cycle in here somewhere, but how big, I don't know. Can we (humans) keep growing as we are? Probably not. Will the earth survive? Absolutely. Will we? Probably, but things will change. They always have and always will. -- Joe -- Joseph M. Krzeszewski Mechanical Engineering and stuff Jack of All Trades, Master of None... Yet |
James wrote:
My thots on GW are this: the weather runs in cycles. The models that are used are way too simple to be effective. The effects of volcanoes aren't included. When Mt. Pinatubo (sp) exploded, the global temp. went down a couple of tenths. When Kracatoa (sp) exploded (1894), it was called "the year without summer". There were frosts in Atlanta in July. When I was in school (grad in 65), we were told another ice age was coming. I think the GW talk is similar to the old "redistribution schemes". You guys (America, Western Europe) use 50% of the world's energy, but only have 8% of the population. I think GW is bunk. It was another way to tax (co2 credits) the citizens of the industrialized world. I used computer modeling to predict the flight characteristics of guided weapons. The more data you get, the better your model. I don't think the atmosphere can be modeled very easily. If your worried, I would move to high ground. I live 13 feet above sea level on the Gulf coast of Florida. I'm not worried. I'm sure you understand about the polar ice caps. The arctic ice floats on the ocean. It doesn't sit on the bottom. Now here's an experiment for you. Take a glass and fill it with ice. Then fill it to the brim with water. Polar ice caps? Antartica has most of its ice landbased, it melts, 13 ft ASL isn't going to save you.. Tom |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 15:18:06 -0500, Ned Simmons
wrote: In article , says... On 18 Feb 2005 13:25:49 -0800, wrote: "The models got it right. If a politician stands up and says the uncertainty is too great to believe these models, that is no longer tenable." The quote is from the Times (UK): http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFr...9955-3,00.html. Back to "lurk mode". http://naturalscience.com/ns/cover/cover5.html An eight year old article that actually supports the notion of global warming. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...s/Ice_Age.html Is a New Ice Age Under Way? by Laurence Hecht ?Watch out, Al Gore. The glaciers will get you!? With that appended note, my friend, retired field geologist Jack Sauers, forwarded to me a report that should have been a lead item in every newspaper in the world. It was the news that the best-measured glacier in North America, the Nisqually on Mount Rainier, has been growing since 1931. Excerpted from a magazine published by Lyndon LaRouche. Yes and? Shall we vet magazines published by Communists and Socialists EG Ned Simmons It's better to be a red person in a blue state than a blue person in a red state. As a red person, if your blue neighbors turn into a mob at least you have a gun to protect yourself. As a blue person, your only hope is to appease the red mob with herbal tea and marinated tofu. (Phil Garding) |
Lew Hartswick wrote:
Tom wrote: Polar ice caps? Antartica has most of its ice landbased, it melts, 13 ft ASL isn't going to save you.. Tom And a few, even quite a few, degrees is not going to melt much of the antartic ice cap with the summer temps that exist there. All the ice shelfs in that part of the world are also floating. ...lew... So you say...based on what? Tom |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:59:37 GMT, Gunner
wrote: On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 08:29:23 -0800, "SteveB" wrote: The fanatics who have already moved out to the countryside and mountains will have target practice on these new untrained newbies. Those who have set up home food storage programs will bunker in, but will be beseiged, just as ancient cities were. They will be trapped like rats. They will survive as long as their foods last, and they are not over run. They will have the weather and elements on their side. Fanatics? Since when is prudence considered fanaticism? G Prudent Gunner It's better to be a red person in a blue state than a blue person in a red state. As a red person, if your blue neighbors turn into a mob at least you have a gun to protect yourself. As a blue person, your only hope is to appease the red mob with herbal tea and marinated tofu. (Phil Garding) Aw Gunner, come on now, you know it's foolish to prepare for emergencies, that's what those nice folks at FEMA and the Red Cross are for. If there is a major earthquake, just go sit in the corner and suck your thumb until help arrives! If, God forbid, there were a nuclear war you know it would be better to die of starvation than to survive in a world without television and BMW's. Seriously though, I have personal experience with using my BOB to great advantage in less than life threatening circumstances and would sure hate to starve to death or die of thirst because I thought the grocery stores would always filled with bounty (or even standing). To avoid being called a looney I quit calling myself a "survivalist". I am now referring to myself as "Terrorist Event Resistant". Gary Hallenbeck |
Lew Hartswick wrote:
Tom wrote: Lew Hartswick wrote: Tom wrote: Polar ice caps? Antartica has most of its ice landbased, it melts, 13 ft ASL isn't going to save you.. Tom And a few, even quite a few, degrees is not going to melt much of the antartic ice cap with the summer temps that exist there. All the ice shelfs in that part of the world are also floating. ...lew... So you say...based on what? Tom For the first, the melting point of ice. For the second the definition of an ice shelf. ...lew... LOL! No need for scientists in your world! |
Tim Killian wrote:
Cities exist only because of readily available supplies of food and water. Both of those depend on cheap and available fuel for trucks, Probably a good scenario for a post apocalypse movies or something, but little relationship to reality. Firstly, you are replying to a different scenario than I was commenting on and basically are talking well after the dust has settled, but in any case... It might be slightly different in the US, but most fuel in this country originates from the city. It is bulk shipped around the coast by tanker from the refineries, then distributed from capital city ports. What is it like there? Now, how much do you know about Just-In-Time in food, fuel, etc supplies? I'll give you a hint; modern warehouse are called distribution centres for a very good reason and that reason is that if anything sits in them for longer than 24 hours, then they are not being efficently run. And to cut a long story short, where does all that food and materials (ignoring imports) actually come from? Start ****ing off the country folk that grow this stuff and you could find yourself with one very starving city. |
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:35:42 +1100, Terry Collins
wrote: Tim Killian wrote: Cities exist only because of readily available supplies of food and water. Both of those depend on cheap and available fuel for trucks, Probably a good scenario for a post apocalypse movies or something, but little relationship to reality. Firstly, you are replying to a different scenario than I was commenting on and basically are talking well after the dust has settled, but in any case... It might be slightly different in the US, but most fuel in this country originates from the city. It is bulk shipped around the coast by tanker from the refineries, then distributed from capital city ports. What is it like there? Now, how much do you know about Just-In-Time in food, fuel, etc supplies? I'll give you a hint; modern warehouse are called distribution centres for a very good reason and that reason is that if anything sits in them for longer than 24 hours, then they are not being efficently run. And to cut a long story short, where does all that food and materials (ignoring imports) actually come from? Start ****ing off the country folk that grow this stuff and you could find yourself with one very starving city. It should be also noted..that the average supermarket has food enough on the shelf for 3 days. Period. End program. Full stop. After 4 days..even the smoked oysters in grub sauce are gone, if the trucks stop running. Gunner It's better to be a red person in a blue state than a blue person in a red state. As a red person, if your blue neighbors turn into a mob at least you have a gun to protect yourself. As a blue person, your only hope is to appease the red mob with herbal tea and marinated tofu. (Phil Garding) |
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:54:54 GMT, Gunner
wrote: On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:51:38 -0600, "B.B." . ru wrote: In article , Gunner wrote: [...] What's junky about the global warming science? When you find some that actually Involves science, we'll talk. I'll pass on it, then. I don't want to get wrapped up in dragging OT political junk in here. I just wondered if you had any specific comments. I think my comment above pretty much covers it. Gunner Rule #35 "That which does not kill you, has made a huge tactical error" Well, I made it this far in one shot, this thread goes on and on. From what I have gathered , the earth has been very violently changed in the past. One good example is the debris unless I under estimate time , but some must have been done very suddenly. I can't imagine what could move huge boulders and smaller aggregate into such flat planes unless there was alot of moving water all at once and many times over. Maybe most of it has stopped or slowed down to let life continue. It wouldn't have to be global , but sure would wipe out every body around you. Reminds me, I stole back my ahhh what was it... Worlds in Collision book. Went through a couple of people. It was the only book in that sorry store that even looked close enough to worth attempting to read. 50 cents later I was entertained. Could have sworn that was the year when a friend came to visit and we all walked up rivers and such on a nice day. Girlfriend said something about snow ... anyhow there was about a foot outside the next morning in SA TX '84-5-6 ? I've always thought that the cool elements stay within a certain radius of its sun , even if it has to jump from planet to planet. I'd pick a spot half way from the equator and the poles... Best chances if the world swings around. Ahhh maybe. |
Gunner wrote:
It should be also noted..that the average supermarket has food enough on the shelf for 3 days. Period. End program. Full stop. After 4 days..even the smoked oysters in grub sauce are gone, if the trucks stop running. Gunner Please stop posting information that even idiots can understand. Part of my survival in the burbs strategy is based around a large portion (hopefully the unskilled and stupid parts) of the population starving to death and reducing pressure on food sources. {:-) |
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:03:43 -0800, Sunworshipper
wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:54:54 GMT, Gunner wrote: On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:51:38 -0600, "B.B." .ru wrote: In article , Gunner wrote: [...] What's junky about the global warming science? When you find some that actually Involves science, we'll talk. I'll pass on it, then. I don't want to get wrapped up in dragging OT political junk in here. I just wondered if you had any specific comments. I think my comment above pretty much covers it. Gunner Rule #35 "That which does not kill you, has made a huge tactical error" Well, I made it this far in one shot, this thread goes on and on. From what I have gathered , the earth has been very violently changed in the past. One good example is the debris unless I under estimate time , but some must have been done very suddenly. I can't imagine what could move huge boulders and smaller aggregate into such flat planes unless there was alot of moving water all at once and many times over. Maybe most of it has stopped or slowed down to let life continue. It wouldn't have to be global , but sure would wipe out every body around you. Reminds me, I stole back my ahhh what was it... Worlds in Collision book. Went through a couple of people. It was the only book in that sorry store that even looked close enough to worth attempting to read. 50 cents later I was entertained. Could have sworn that was the year when a friend came to visit and we all walked up rivers and such on a nice day. Girlfriend said something about snow ... anyhow there was about a foot outside the next morning in SA TX '84-5-6 ? I've always thought that the cool elements stay within a certain radius of its sun , even if it has to jump from planet to planet. I'd pick a spot half way from the equator and the poles... Best chances if the world swings around. Ahhh maybe. Read all now , cept all the y2k , might as well go on. Being in the Sierra Nevada I can't help to notice the valleys are filled in basically flat and the mountain tops are clean with minimal debris next to them. I would doubt that the earth changes temperature drastically all by itself. Has to be from incoming bombardment or the Sun going through cycles. I think the planet is moving away from the sun. Mars is dead and Venus is the next earth. It would be fun to see alot of data on the fading hits and get a good grip on time and calculate what a nice deep ocean hit would do... Make the grand canyon in a couple of waves. Look at the poor moon. How many hits can be counted and what 5 billion years? Hmmm reminds me of a kid I saw yesterday pawing with her little hands under the vending machine and pulled out a coin. That never crossed my mind as a kid. Maybe a stick once in a while , mirror would be better , but never pawing the periphery edges at random. I'm surprised that space is so clear. Must be really old ! Unless we're just dust bunnies and it looks clean from our perspective. Canada ? I'd run and run fast don't look back and get closer to the equator. Blah blah blah 40 below, should I buy land and make a fortune when it warms up. LOL Is it ever going to stop raining on the left coast? I always thought this high desert all beach and no water , just not old enough to experience the next wave is all. |
I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show John Ings
wrote back on Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:55:08 -0800 in rec.crafts.metalworking : On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:13:09 GMT, pyotr filipivich wrote: This, however, is an exception to the general rule about prudent investing. In 1961 my father died and left me $1500. I had my choice of either buying gold, which had been stable at around $35 an oz for decades, or mutual funds. I bought the mutual funds. A few years later I cashed in the the mutual fund certificates for $900. At the time gold was well over $300 an oz and still rising! That must have been quite a few years later :-) If I knew then, what I know now, among other things, I'd have bought a couple Beatles LPs, and left them "as is". If memory serves, the "butcher cover" album, if it still has the second cover pasted over it, is worth like 15,000 a pop. A good bit of a return on investment, if your mom doesn't toss them out. Oh well... is right. tschus pyotr -- pyotr filipivich. as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with." |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter