"Red" wrote in message
...
On Oct 29, 11:03 pm, "Capt. JG" wrote:

"Red" wrote in message

news

J Ganz:

You mean like the continuing drought in the South East and the
wild fires
in California?



Santa Anna and El Nino are the 2 prevalent phenomenons that
control that
kind of weather on the left coast. Its been happening that way
since long
before us eruopeans set foot here. And the FBI says the fires, or
at least
some of the significant ones, were set by arsonists.
Doesn't anyone remember anything about the "Great Dustbowl" of
the 1930's?
Just in case you haven't been educated, there wasn't any
refrigerant being
released into the air in great quantities then. Yet that drought
lasted
for years, not months. Its a natural thing, get it?
Red


Whatever you say. Get it?

--
"j" ganz

Tom:
Clearly you are not selling a book, movie, or trying to get a grant
on global warming.

I know. I usually try to steer away from these religious discussions but
sometimes it gets so frustrating how people can be led like sheep to the
slaughter - to believe anything some religious (yes, politics is practiced
today just like a religion, so why not just call it what it is?) nutcase
lke Bishop Al Gore tells them. And the masses just nod their pious heads
and continue bleeting the same nonsense as if its true.
Red


I guess you never heard about the wild variations that are part and parcel
of the global warming situation. Do you really think it's as simple as 'this
year and all following years it's going to be hotter'?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:36:00 -0500, Red said:

Doesn't anyone remember anything about the "Great Dustbowl" of the
1930's? Just in case you haven't been educated, there wasn't any
refrigerant being released into the air in great quantities then. Yet
that drought lasted for years, not months. Its a natural thing, get it?

Trying to persuade an enviro of that is like trying to persuade a Roman
Catholic that Papal infallibility is a myth. In both cases it's a
religious
thing.


Don't worry about it... play with your fiddle as Rome burns.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:09:56 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

I guess you never heard about the wild variations that are part and parcel
of the global warming situation. Do you really think it's as simple as
'this
year and all following years it's going to be hotter'?

IIRC, until Martin Luther insisted the Bible should be translated into
German, the standard party line was that it was much too complex to be
understood by non-clergy.


I think the party line was right!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Dave wrote:

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:09:56 -0700, "Capt. JG" said:

I guess you never heard about the wild variations that are part and parcel
of the global warming situation. Do you really think it's as simple as 'this
year and all following years it's going to be hotter'?

IIRC, until Martin Luther insisted the Bible should be translated into
German, the standard party line was that it was much too complex to be
understood by non-clergy.

most of whom couldn't read anyway!

--
Molesworth

I said some stuff, and Jon calmly replied:
This is just your rant and certainly your opinion, but you sure make it
sound like fact. It isn't.

Therein lies the problem... how specifically do you *know* it isn't
fact? Maybe you haven't been exposed to other information because like
politicians the press pretty much only carries the doom and gloom
message. Have you done any of your own research into what other
scientists are saying?

You replied further:
Look how you refer to him.. Bishop Al. This makes your whole argument
sound foolish.

This was my original point. I am referring to him that way to illustrate
how people believe so deeply and have so much invested in believing the
politics of their particular party that it has turned into the practice
of religion. And religions like the two political parties in this
country represent have their sanctimonius leaders and gods who are
worshipped similar to any religion. And those who are the true believers
are completely and totally unwilling to see or hear anything else that
may be even slightly different than what their particular
politico/religious leaders are spouting. To even suggest something
different brings cries of HERETIC! Unbeliever! Stone him!

I have no problem if you don't believe humans are causing GW. It's your
right to believe or not. I choose to believe that it's better to be
safe than sorry, and the way to be safe doesn't hurt the economy if
done properly.

Thank you for recognizing my right to believe differently than you. And
as I've said, I also believe that we as a nation and as individuals
should be doing things to help keep our water and air clean. What I do
not beleive is that some unsubstantiated "science" should be used by
politicians as a vehicle to usurp our rights or cost us our livelyhood -
especially since those same politicians are not doing it for altruistic
reasons, but are doing it to gain more control over us and steal our
hard earned money. And that is what is behind AG's bull****. By the way,
have you ever seen the government do something "properly" that hasn't
cost you in the long run? If they could, I'd be happy to let them as
long as they don't step on my rights. Fact is when you entice business
to do something about a problem and let them to make a profit doing it,
they usually come up with a far better solution than the government ever
could.

There are always going to be people hurt by new ways of doing things.
That's life.
-- "j" ganz @@

And that is always wrong when done on purpose, as is in this case. This
is all about politics, not about science. And if enough people stopped
accepting what their politicians say just because they say it, and start
thinking for themselves and evaluating all the available information on
any subject, we would be far far better off as a nation and as a people
and we would be able to force politicians to do what is good for the
country, not just what is good for their reelection...
Of course the downside to that would be that we might all start getting
along better as we would begin again to be able to start having respect
for each other and each other's opinions - since those would BE each
other's opinions, not the opinions of their politicians simply repeated.
I'm done.
Red

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:09:56 -0700, "Capt. JG" said:
I guess you never heard about the wild variations that are part and
parcel
of the global warming situation. Do you really think it's as simple
as 'this
year and all following years it's going to be hotter'?

Dave:
IIRC, until Martin Luther insisted the Bible should be translated into
German, the standard party line was that it was much too complex to be
understood by non-clergy.

Jonathan,
I know you'll probably dismiss this, but what I've been saying isn't a
personal attack. It is an attack on the new American habit of just
believing whatever some idiot says just because he holds some place in
society. Bishop Al says global warming is our fault. Reputable
scientists - the ones who don't operate on grants so don't have
something to gain from the discussion, say the science we have today is
inconclusive. They say it is inconclusive because we do not yet have the
science to be able to properly interpret the research. Bishop Al, on the
other hand, is making millions on this debate all the while telling us
we should be riding bicycles to work as he's flying all over creation in
his private jet burning more fossil fuel in a day than most of us will
burn in a lifetime.

Is there Global Warming? If there is, is it our fault? Hell, I don't
know! And what's more its a fact that you don't know either - you can't
possibly know if the science isn't up to the task of interpreting the
research. But that doesn't stop some politician from trying to gain even
more control over our lives and tax us to death just because he can in
the name of junk science. Just look closely at the politics *as well as*
the real lowdown on stem cell research to see how much your politicians
lie to you all the time.

Back in 1974 I had the distinct priviledge of working for NOAA on a
research project (G.A.T.E.) looking at the world's weather systems. The
scientists aboard were among the tops in their fields. At that time
several told me that we were heading into a global freeze - another ice
age, all due to pollution. All of these guys were operating on grants.

Just a short while ago there was a news announcement from several
prominant vulcanologists that the earth's atmosphere was finally coming
off the several year *cooling period* due to the last of the sulfer
dioxide from the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo leaving the atmosphere. So
who're ya gonna believe? Bishop Al who doesn't even know what he wrote
in his book, or leading vulcanologists?

Am I against stopping pollution? Hell NO! I definately want to see the
end of the polluting of our air and water. But not because I believe
assholes like Bishop Al and his legion of anti freedom crusaders, but
because I'd like to live in a clean world and leave it clean for our
decendants. What I'd really like, and this aint never gonna happen, is
for people to begin to think for themselves instead of just taking the
word of scumbag leeches like Bishop Al and then repeating his verbal
vomit over and over as if its true. Look at all the *actual* data - on
any subject, and then think for yourself. Of course the danger in doing
this is that your politicians certainly won't look so good anymore...
See if your politician isn't a liar - ha!
Rant off.
Red

"Red" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:09:56 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:
I guess you never heard about the wild variations that are part and
parcel
of the global warming situation. Do you really think it's as simple
as 'this
year and all following years it's going to be hotter'?

Dave:
IIRC, until Martin Luther insisted the Bible should be translated into
German, the standard party line was that it was much too complex to be
understood by non-clergy.

Jonathan,
I know you'll probably dismiss this, but what I've been saying isn't a
personal attack. It is an attack on the new American habit of just
believing whatever some idiot says just because he holds some place in
society. Bishop Al says global warming is our fault. Reputable
scientists - the ones who don't operate on grants so don't have something
to gain from the discussion, say the science we have today is
inconclusive. They say it is inconclusive because we do not yet have the
science to be able to properly interpret the research. Bishop Al, on the
other hand, is making millions on this debate all the while telling us we
should be riding bicycles to work as he's flying all over creation in his
private jet burning more fossil fuel in a day than most of us will burn in
a lifetime.

Is there Global Warming? If there is, is it our fault? Hell, I don't know!
And what's more its a fact that you don't know either - you can't possibly
know if the science isn't up to the task of interpreting the research. But
that doesn't stop some politician from trying to gain even more control
over our lives and tax us to death just because he can in the name of junk
science. Just look closely at the politics *as well as* the real lowdown
on stem cell research to see how much your politicians lie to you all the
time.

Back in 1974 I had the distinct priviledge of working for NOAA on a
research project (G.A.T.E.) looking at the world's weather systems. The
scientists aboard were among the tops in their fields. At that time
several told me that we were heading into a global freeze - another ice
age, all due to pollution. All of these guys were operating on grants.

Just a short while ago there was a news announcement from several
prominant vulcanologists that the earth's atmosphere was finally coming
off the several year *cooling period* due to the last of the sulfer
dioxide from the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo leaving the atmosphere. So
who're ya gonna believe? Bishop Al who doesn't even know what he wrote in
his book, or leading vulcanologists?

Am I against stopping pollution? Hell NO! I definately want to see the end
of the polluting of our air and water. But not because I believe assholes
like Bishop Al and his legion of anti freedom crusaders, but because I'd
like to live in a clean world and leave it clean for our decendants. What
I'd really like, and this aint never gonna happen, is for people to begin
to think for themselves instead of just taking the word of scumbag leeches
like Bishop Al and then repeating his verbal vomit over and over as if its
true. Look at all the *actual* data - on any subject, and then think for
yourself. Of course the danger in doing this is that your politicians
certainly won't look so good anymore...
See if your politician isn't a liar - ha!
Rant off.
Red


I appreciate that you're not attacking me personally. However, what you're
claiming is that the vast majority of scientists who are knowledgeable in
this area are wrong, along of course with the Nobel committee. Sure, AG
isn't a scientist, but despite some minor errors in his rant, he's over all
quite on target. 1974 was a long time ago. There's been a lot more
information since then. But, it's nice to know that you think pollution is a
bad thing. If that's the case, why take a chance? Complaining that someone
is making money from the GW crisis (right or wrong) is certainly the
capitalistic system. It sure is better than making money off of the dead
bodies we're so quick to dismiss in places like Iraq, Darfur, etc., etc., al
la Haliburton and Cheney's other good buddies. Rant off.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Jon,
You're missing the point I was making. The "vast majority of
scientists who are knowledgeable in this area" are making their living
on grants. They have an investment on making you believe what they are
telling you so they can continue getting grants which is how they make
their living. They don't have to tell you the truth, and in this case
they aren't, they just need you to buy into their story so they can keep
getting paid. Bishop Al is on target because he's parroting those grant
receiving "scientists". And yes, it IS a bad thing for AG to be making
money on this, because he's hoodwinking people into falsly believing
things that are going to ultimately cost them their livelyhood, their
savings, and their future. And he wants, more than anything, to be a
King. No problem here with someone wanting to make money, even lots of
it. But gaining control and wealth on the backs of the rest of us using
false pretenses is always wrong. Once again, reputable scientists - the
ones who have no investment, say that we do not yet have the ability to
interpret the research one way or the other. Until that day when they
can, Al is still a leech. And if it ultimately IS true that there is
global warming, it still isn't Bishop Al's place to tell me without real
solid science that it is MY fault and even less his place to tell me to
change my meager lifestyle - especially when HE is polluting more than
any of us. False gods...
Red

"Red" wrote in message
...
Jon,
You're missing the point I was making. The "vast majority of scientists
who are knowledgeable in this area" are making their living on grants.
They have an investment on making you believe what they are

Come on... the vast majority of scientists believe in science before they
believe in grant money. Their primary belief structure is based on seeking
the truth.

telling you so they can continue getting grants which is how they make
their living. They don't have to tell you the truth, and in this case they
aren't, they just need you to buy into their story so they can keep
getting paid. Bishop Al is on target because he's parroting those grant
receiving "scientists". And yes, it IS a bad thing for AG to be making
money on this, because he's hoodwinking people into falsly believing
things that are going to ultimately cost them their livelyhood, their
savings, and their future. And he wants, more than anything, to be a King.
No problem here with someone wanting to make money, even lots of

This is just your rant and certainly your opinion, but you sure make it
sound like fact. It isn't.

it. But gaining control and wealth on the backs of the rest of us using
false pretenses is always wrong. Once again, reputable scientists - the
ones who have no investment, say that we do not yet have the ability to
interpret the research one way or the other. Until that day when they can,
Al is still a leech. And if it ultimately IS true that there is global
warming, it still isn't Bishop Al's place to tell me without real solid
science that it is MY fault and even less his place to tell me to change
my meager lifestyle - especially when HE is polluting more than any of us.
False gods...
Red

Look how you refer to him.. Bishop Al. This makes your whole argument sound
foolish.

I have no problem if you don't believe humans are causing GW. It's your
right to believe or not. I choose to believe that it's better to be safe
than sorry, and the way to be safe doesn't hurt the economy if done
properly. There are always going to be people hurt by new ways of doing
things. That's life.



--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Oct 31, 12:34 pm, Red wrote:
... Therein lies the problem... how specifically do you *know* it isn't
fact? Maybe you haven't been exposed to other information because like
politicians the press pretty much only carries the doom and gloom
message. Have you done any of your own research into what other
scientists are saying? ...

Have you seen: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...306/5702/1686?

I certainly wouldn't argue that scientists are super humans, perfectly
disinterested, unaffected by fads, fashion or grant money. Nor are
they able to escape the limits of talent, time or resources. And it
seems axiomatic that politicians aren't always truthful with their
constituents. But how does it follow that there is a conspiracy to
deceive? If nothing else, Occam's razor suggests that a complex
theory like yours with its complete perversion of academia, media and
politics is less likely than the simple theory that most climate
scientists are telling the truth as they see it. So, I've got to ask,
where is your evidence for this conspiracy?

-- Tom.