http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html


The problem is that this is the warmest decade on record. The fact
that there are huge variations is even more telling that adverse,
human-caused climate change is happening.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/sc...22warming.html

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html



That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....


Make a generalized prediction and it is sure to come true.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 07:47:21 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html



That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....


Make a generalized prediction and it is sure to come true.

I see.......

Nostradamus is a perfect example.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:10:03 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:57:05 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....

If only there were some natural mechanism for explaining the warming
and cooling of the earth.

It would have to be unreasonably large, however -- on the scale of our
own sun.

Oh wait - yes there is!!!!

http://www.solarcycle24.com/pictures/spots.jpg

See Dalton Minimum for more information. :)

As I said, if you don't know the science, then you can't make an
informed judgment.

On 12/20/10 8:44 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:10:03 -0500,
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:57:05 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....

If only there were some natural mechanism for explaining the warming
and cooling of the earth.

It would have to be unreasonably large, however -- on the scale of our
own sun.

Oh wait - yes there is!!!!

http://www.solarcycle24.com/pictures/spots.jpg

See Dalton Minimum for more information. :)

As I said, if you don't know the science, then you can't make an
informed judgment.

What if you know the science is fudged? I mean we have proof of that. On
the same hand, you don't have proof that my "faith" is fudged, yet you
are quick to dismiss that, it just doesn't add up really...


"We" have proof of that? "We"? Something you heard on Faux News?

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:31:53 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:44:40 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:10:03 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:57:05 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....

If only there were some natural mechanism for explaining the warming
and cooling of the earth.

It would have to be unreasonably large, however -- on the scale of our
own sun.

Oh wait - yes there is!!!!

http://www.solarcycle24.com/pictures/spots.jpg

See Dalton Minimum for more information. :)

As I said, if you don't know the science, then you can't make an
informed judgment.

What if you know the science is fudged? I mean we have proof of that. On
the same hand, you don't have proof that my "faith" is fudged, yet you
are quick to dismiss that, it just doesn't add up really...


Please cite......

Fox News Channel is likely his best cite.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:31:53 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:44:40 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:10:03 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:57:05 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....

If only there were some natural mechanism for explaining the warming
and cooling of the earth.

It would have to be unreasonably large, however -- on the scale of our
own sun.

Oh wait - yes there is!!!!

http://www.solarcycle24.com/pictures/spots.jpg

See Dalton Minimum for more information. :)

As I said, if you don't know the science, then you can't make an
informed judgment.

What if you know the science is fudged? I mean we have proof of that. On
the same hand, you don't have proof that my "faith" is fudged, yet you
are quick to dismiss that, it just doesn't add up really...


Please cite......

Oh he's talking about some stolen emails that really don't have much
to do with the overall conclusions.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:47:10 -0500, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 17:38:19 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:10:03 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:57:05 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:57:42 -0500, BAR wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...-just-a-thing-
of-the-past-724017.html

That article is 10 years old. THIS year, Europe has been clobbered
with snow....just as predicted by the global increase in
temperature....

If only there were some natural mechanism for explaining the warming
and cooling of the earth.

It would have to be unreasonably large, however -- on the scale of our
own sun.

Oh wait - yes there is!!!!

http://www.solarcycle24.com/pictures/spots.jpg

See Dalton Minimum for more information. :)

As I said, if you don't know the science, then you can't make an
informed judgment.

You know what I find highly amusing?

Idiots like you who don't understand that the largest source of energy
that affects our planet on a day-to-day basis - the Sun - has more to
do with weather and climate than anthropogenic hocus pocus, flim flam
zam.

It must be voo doo that events like the Oort Minimum (1010 - 1080),
Wolf Minimum (1280 - 1350), Sporer Minimum (1450 - 1540), Maunder
Minimum (1645-1715), Dalton Minimum (1790 - 1820) just happened to
coincidentally occur when there were cold periods in our climate. Must
be voo doo that the Medieval Maximum (1100 - 1250) happened to be a
huge warm period. Must not be that Earth is on the down slope of a
Modern Maximum and heading into a secondary Dalton Minimum.

An atmospheric carbon cycle that coincides with these solar events is
all fake science right? Only deniers believe in faked fudged facts
and make **** up right?

Speaking of making **** up - what's the latest on the good old "hockey
stick" theory? How about all those penguins who drowned when all the
ice melted in the Arctic? And what ever happened to the CCX - the
Chicago Carbon Exchange? Is that even still around?

Back to the point - solar science and it's effect on our atmosphere,
climate and weather is bull**** right? No science there. I mean, I
can understand your view point - the sun is a bizillion gazillion
miles from Earth - can't have a freakin' thing to do with Earth's
weather. Things like solar flux, magnetic density around the Earth -
it's all hore**** - real science depends on politics and sound
reasoning right?

Do me a favor - bend over, stick your head between your legs and check
out check out the view - it's proably the South bound end of a North
bound horse.

Whew.. somebody sure is angry they didn't spend more time studying in
high school...

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 22:09:10 -0500, W1TEF
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:31:09 -0500, Gene
wrote:


Now.... as I see it, we have the same problem.... if the contribution
of heat by man is sufficient, if there *IS* a tipping point, it could
mean the end of life as we know it.....

I agree with that completely.

However, scientists are supposed to be skeptical. A good scientist
will never, EVER, say definetly, positively, absoutely, "pinky swear"
and something is incontrovertible fact. Only mathematicians can make
those kinds of statements and usually those are covered by caveats.

There has been no, I repeat no, real science on climate change. Things
like average global temperature just don't exist. Can't exist unless
you can cover every square meter of land and sea with temperature
reporting devices and that ain't gonna happen. You can't even use
statistical techniques, including fractal math I might add, to obtain
an average temperature - the biosphere is too large.

The science has been all one sided with no room for other ideas and
concepts. Well known effects of solar science are dismissed as
"secondary" or "irrelevant". It's all about carbon.

Answer me this - Mt. Pinatubo blew up in 1991, it released some
ungodly amount of CO2 into the atmosphere along with some other
noxious gases like hydrogen sulfide and a couple of other "ides". Net
result - a decrease in reported temperatures of about 1 degree
Celisus. The amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere was equal to
the entire CO2 output of the world for ten years - TEN years.

Hello? Bueller?

You're right - we don't know. Erroring on the side of change though is
economically treacherous. What is needed is good science - real
science that accounts for everything, solar, atmophere, pollution -
the whole panoply of sciences that directly affect our living space.

The solution isn't "clean energy". Under the guise of "carbon
reduction" movement of wealth from the developed world and giving it
away to the un-developed world - it's as simple as that. It is an
international social solution to third world poverty - it's not about
climate science.

That does not mean that we shouldn't work towards a fossil fuel free
future - I agree that is important and necessary if only because of
the pollution problems. But we need more and better science - not
some faked, fudged "temperture" charts, hocus pocus emotionally
charged statements about settled science.

Wow... you really don't know much about science.