Another trick that may help is rinsing the pieces in acetone as they come out of
the cleaning solution.  The acetone will remove the water before it helps cause
rusting.  The obvious downsides are the need for adequate ventilation and the
fire hazard.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone

You might also want to try posting the original question on the 7x12 group; some
of the folks who can provide better answers were driven away from this group by
the excessive political noise.

Roy


--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@...> wrote:
>
> I am not satisfied with cleanup from one compound to another. Been just using
water with a little dish washing liquid. Tried heating it up but that encouraged
rust spots. Any suggestions for a rust preventative or a better cleaner?
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen
Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

You may simply stop posting political comment any time you like.  That will
alter the ratio significantly.

Sam

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@...> wrote:
>
> Did you say that posting articles was no allowed ?
>
> I have to say that you have really effected this group and send the machining
members on their way.
>
> we used to be over 50% machining talk.  and the answer to political was that
when a machining question came up, we went there and put the politics aside for
a bit.
>
> now you have created a group of spam with some odd machining talk tossed in.
>

American victory in Afghanistan is precisely what the region - and the world -
does NOT need.

What you call your "current message to the world" is merely what the world has
long since concluded. You do NOT know what you are doing, nor "how to act".

You may have the desire "to win" but you simply do not have the ability.

With NATO in charge there will be no "victory". There will simply be a long,
slow, painful evolution of a society able to govern itself on its own terms
devoid of reference to America.

Sam


--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> >
> > Obama has already begun to implement the ONLY "exit strategy" that will work
-
>
>
> no, it is doomed to failure.
> by letting the war go for 10 months without any decision, he is sending the
message we are not interested in a victory.
>
> by putting a terrorist into civilian court we are offering a platform for the
world to mock us
>
> by persecuting military personal for capturing a high level, high value
target, we are sending the world a message we have no stomach for war and are
afraid of it.
>
> The ONLY exit strategy that has ever worked is victory.
>
> I offered Obama's best shot at getting out.
> send in everything we got.  The mother of all surges.
> send entire armys thru a vilage of walking  on the street missions.
> show them a presense like they have never seen.
>
> then leave.
>
> show them you CAN if YOU chose. send the message that you ARE powerful, no
afraid.
>
> our current message to the world is that we have no clue what to do, nor how
to act.  no desire to win.
>
> Dave
>

Ah Pravda has been reinstated in western Canada I see.

JWE
Long Beach, CA

----- Original Message -----
From: "x" <lesleynward@...>
To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 11:39 PM
Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: WHAT OBAMA COULD SAY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
ABOUT WAR OT:


> Obama has already begun to implement the ONLY "exit strategy" that will
> work - the one I have advocated for years and which is now being made
> manifest through the appointment of the former Danish Prime Minister (of
> the party that in Danish is known simply as "The Left Party") as Secretary
> General of NATO, and of a Canadian, M.Gen. Michael Ward (8th Canadian
> Hussars), as Commander of NATO's ISAF including its American component.
> Obama has NOT opposed those appointments, and I suspect that being a
> sensible man he has campaigned sotto voce in the international councils
> for such appointments.  The winding down of that ill-begotten,
> all-American "mission" named "Operation Enduring Freedom" by he who fled
> when he should have flown, and America's leaving Afghanistan except as
> present under NATO's aegis will enable "nation building" to proceed
> despite the numerous problems in that unfortunate land that are in large
> measure the legacy of a failed and reprehensible foreign policy by the US,
> a "nation" that is, experience shows, unable to govern herself well, let
> alone stand as a role model for other peoples.
>
> Obama, brave though he be, will be a one term president.  If, on Tuesday,
> he says that additional troops will be sent, he will be kicked to death by
> donkeys.  If, on the other hand, he says that no more troops will be sent,
> he will be trampled to death by elephants. It is an amazing thing that a
> man with such courage should arise in American politics, a man that is
> willing to sacrifice his political career and his personal reputation by
> standing four-square for what is meet and just in direct and irresolvable
> conflict with so many of his own people who are hell-bent on doing what is
> wrong and reprehensible.
>
> As Obama, one way or the other, will be committing political harikiri on
> Tuesday, he will now have a good three years of being a "lame duck".  And
> that is WONDERFUL!  The effect of that will be that without having to
> worry about constant interference from Washington, other nations can now
> go about tidying up the mess the US has created in the Middle East. It
> will take time, but it CAN be done. Provided the US stays out of it.
>
> Sam
>
>

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@...> wrote:
>
> Obama has already begun to implement the ONLY "exit strategy" that will work -


no, it is doomed to failure.
by letting the war go for 10 months without any decision, he is sending the
message we are not interested in a victory.

by putting a terrorist into civilian court we are offering a platform for the
world to mock us

by persecuting military personal for capturing a high level, high value target,
we are sending the world a message we have no stomach for war and are afraid of
it.

The ONLY exit strategy that has ever worked is victory.

I offered Obama's best shot at getting out.
send in everything we got.  The mother of all surges.
send entire armys thru a vilage of walking  on the street missions.
show them a presense like they have never seen.

then leave.

show them you CAN if YOU chose. send the message that you ARE powerful, no
afraid.

our current message to the world is that we have no clue what to do, nor how to
act.  no desire to win.

Dave

Did you say that posting articles was no allowed ?

I have to say that you have really effected this group and send the machining
members on their way.

we used to be over 50% machining talk.  and the answer to political was that
when a machining question came up, we went there and put the politics aside for
a bit.

now you have created a group of spam with some odd machining talk tossed in.

Obama has already begun to implement the ONLY "exit strategy" that will work -
the one I have advocated for years and which is now being made manifest through
the appointment of the former Danish Prime Minister (of the party that in Danish
is known simply as "The Left Party") as Secretary General of NATO, and of a
Canadian, M.Gen. Michael Ward (8th Canadian Hussars), as Commander of NATO's
ISAF including its American component.  Obama has NOT opposed those
appointments, and I suspect that being a sensible man he has campaigned sotto
voce in the international councils for such appointments.  The winding down of
that ill-begotten, all-American "mission" named "Operation Enduring Freedom" by
he who fled when he should have flown, and America's leaving Afghanistan except
as present under NATO's aegis will enable "nation building" to proceed despite
the numerous problems in that unfortunate land that are in large measure the
legacy of a failed and reprehensible foreign policy by the US, a "nation" that
is, experience shows, unable to govern herself well, let alone stand as a role
model for other peoples.

Obama, brave though he be, will be a one term president.  If, on Tuesday, he
says that additional troops will be sent, he will be kicked to death by donkeys.
If, on the other hand, he says that no more troops will be sent, he will be
trampled to death by elephants. It is an amazing thing that a man with such
courage should arise in American politics, a man that is willing to sacrifice
his political career and his personal reputation by standing four-square for
what is meet and just in direct and irresolvable conflict with so many of his
own people who are hell-bent on doing what is wrong and reprehensible.

As Obama, one way or the other, will be committing political harikiri on
Tuesday, he will now have a good three years of being a "lame duck".  And that
is WONDERFUL!  The effect of that will be that without having to worry about
constant interference from Washington, other nations can now go about tidying up
the mess the US has created in the Middle East. It will take time, but it CAN be
done. Provided the US stays out of it.

Sam





--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "loosecannonsbluesband" <fairymagic13@...>
wrote:
>
> Here's a great little article about the upcoming issuance of US foreign policy
by our POTUS on Tuesday.
>
>  http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175141
>
>
>
>               During the presidential campaign I called Afghanistan "the right
war." Let me say this: with the full information resources of the American
presidency at my fingertips, I no longer believe that to be the case. I no
longer believe that to be the case....
>
>
>
> And the best information available to me on the situation in Afghanistan is
sobering. It doesn't matter whether you are listening to our war commander,
General Stanley McChrystal, who, as press reports have indicated, believes that
with approximately 80,000 more troops -- which we essentially don't have
available -- there would be a reasonable chance of conducting a successful
counterinsurgency war against the Taliban, or our ambassador to that country,
Karl Eikenberry, a former general with significant experience there, who
believes we shouldn't send another soldier at present. All agree on the
following seven points:
>
> 1. We have no partner in Afghanistan. The control of the government of Afghan
President Hamid Karzai hardly extends beyond the embattled capital of Kabul. He
himself has just been returned to office in a presidential election in which
voting fraud on an almost unimaginably large scale was the order of the day. His
administration is believed to have lost all credibility with the Afghan people.
>
> 2. Afghanistan floats in a culture of corruption. This includes President
Karzai's administration up to its highest levels and also the warlords who
control various areas and, like the Taliban insurgency, are to some degree
dependent for their financing on opium, which the country produces in staggering
quantities. Afghanistan, in fact, is not only a narco-state, but the leading
narco-state on the planet.
>
> 3. Despite billions of dollars of American money poured into training the
Afghan security forces, the army is notoriously understrength and largely
ineffective; the police forces are riddled with corruption and held in contempt
by most of the populace.
>
> 4. The Taliban insurgency is spreading and gaining support largely because the
Karzai regime has been so thoroughly discredited, the Afghan police and courts
are so ineffective and corrupt, and reconstruction funds so badly misspent.
Under these circumstances, American and NATO forces increasingly look like an
army of occupation, and more of them are only likely to solidify this
impression.
>
> 5. Al-Qaeda is no longer a significant factor in Afghanistan. The best
intelligence available to me indicates -- and again, whatever their
disagreements, all my advisors agree on this -- that there may be perhaps 100
al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and another 300 in neighboring Pakistan. As I
said in March, our goal has been to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda in
Pakistan and Afghanistan, and on this we have, especially recently, been
successful. Osama bin Laden, of course, remains at large, and his terrorist
organization is still a danger to us, but not a $100 billion-plus danger.
>
> 6. Our war in Afghanistan has become the military equivalent of a massive
bail-out of a firm determined to fail. Simply to send another 40,000 troops to
Afghanistan would, my advisors estimate, cost $40-$54 billion extra dollars;
eighty thousand troops, more than $80 billion. Sending more trainers and
advisors in an effort to double the size of the Afghan security forces, as many
have suggested, would cost another estimated $10 billion a year. These figures
are over and above the present projected annual costs of the war -- $65 billion
-- and would ensure that the American people will be spending $100 billion a
year or more on this war, probably for years to come. Simply put, this is not
money we can afford to squander on a failing war thousands of miles from home.
>
> 7. Our all-volunteer military has for years now shouldered the burden of our
two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if we were capable of sending
40,000-80,000 more troops to Afghanistan, they would without question be
servicepeople on their second, third, fourth, or even fifth tours of duty. A
military, even the best in the world, wears down under this sort of stress and
pressure.
>
> These seven points have been weighing on my mind over the last weeks as we've
deliberated on the right course to take. Tonight, in response to the realities
of Afghanistan as I've just described them to you, I've put aside all the
subjects that ordinarily obsess Washington, especially whether an American
president can reverse the direction of a war and still have an electoral future.
That's for the American people, and them alone, to decide.
>
> Given that, let me say as bluntly as I can that I have decided to send no more
troops to Afghanistan. Beyond that, I believe it is in the national interest of
the American people that this war, like the Iraq War, be drawn down. Over time,
our troops and resources will be brought home in an orderly fashion, while we
ensure that we provide adequate security for the men and women of our Armed
Forces. Ours will be an administration that will stand or fall, as of today, on
this essential position: that we ended, rather than extended, two wars.
>
> This will, of course, take time. But I have already instructed Ambassador
Eikenberry and Special Representative Holbrooke to begin discussions, however
indirectly, with the Taliban insurgents for a truce in place. Before year's end,
I plan to call an international conference of interested countries, including
key regional partners, to help work out a way to settle this conflict. I will,
in addition, soon announce a schedule for the withdrawal of the first American
troops from Afghanistan.
>
> For the counterinsurgency war that we now will not fight, there is already a
path laid out. We walked down that well-mined path once in recent American
memory and we know where it leads. For ending the war in another way, there is
no precedent in our recent history and so no path -- only the unknown. But there
is hope. Let me try to explain.
>
> Recently, comparisons between the Vietnam War and our current conflict in
Afghanistan have been legion. Let me, however, suggest a major difference
between the two. When Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson faced their
crises involving sending more troops into Vietnam, they and their advisors had
little to rely on in the American record. They, in a sense, faced the darkness
of the unknown as they made their choices. The same is not true of us.
>
> In the White House, for instance, a number of us have been reading a book on
how the U.S. got itself ever more disastrously involved in the Vietnam War. We
have history to guide us here. We know what happens in counterinsurgency
campaigns. We have the experience of Vietnam as a landmark on the trail behind
us. And if that weren't enough, of course, we have the path to defeat already
well cleared by the Russians in their Afghan fiasco of the 1980s, when they had
just as many troops in the field as we would have if I had chosen to send those
extra 40,000 Americans. That is the known.
>
> On the other hand, peering down the path of de-escalation, all we can see is
darkness. Nothing like this has been tried before in Washington. But I firmly
believe that this, too, is deeply in the American grain. American immigrants, as
well as slaves, traveled to this country as if into the darkness of the unknown.
Americans have long braved the unknown in all sorts of ways.
>
> To present this more formulaically, if we sent the troops and trainers to
Afghanistan, if we increased air strikes and tried to strengthen the Afghan
Army, we basically know how things are likely to work out: not well. The war is
likely to spread. The insurgents, despite many losses, are likely to grow in
strength. Hatred of Americans is likely to increase. Pakistan is likely to
become more destabilized.
>
> If, however, we don't take such steps and proceed down that other path, we do
not know how things will work out in Afghanistan, or how well.
>
> We do not know how things will work out in Pakistan, or how well.
>
> That is hardly surprising, since we do not know what it means to end such a
war now.
>
> But we must not be scared. America will not -- of this, as your president, I
am convinced -- be a safer nation if it spends many hundreds of billions of
dollars over many years, essentially bankrupting itself and exhausting its
military on what looks increasingly like an unwinnable war. This is not the way
to safety, but to national penury -- and I am unwilling to preside over an
America heading in that direction.
>
> Let me say again that the unknown path, the path into the wilderness, couldn't
be more American. We have always been willing to strike out for ourselves where
others would not go. That, too, is in the best American tradition.
>
> It is, of course, a perilous thing to predict the future, but in the
Afghanistan/Pakistan region, war has visibly only spread war. The beginning of a
negotiated peace may have a similarly powerful effect, but in the opposite
direction. It may actually take the wind out of the sails of the insurgents on
both sides of the Afghan/Pakistan border. It may actually encourage forces in
both countries with which we might be more comfortable to step to the fore.
>
> Certainly, we will do our best to lead the way with any aid or advice we can
offer toward a future peaceful Afghanistan and a future peaceful Pakistan. In
the meantime, I plan to ask Congress to take some of the savings from our two
wars winding down and put them into a genuine jobs program for the American
people.
>
> We cannot afford a failing war in Afghanistan and a 10.2% official
unemployment rate at home. We cannot live with two Americas, one for Wall Street
and one for everyone else. This is not the path to American safety.
>
> It's time for change. I know that not all Americans will agree with me and
that some will be upset by the approach I am now determined to follow. I expect
anger and debate. I take full responsibility for whatever may result from this
policy departure. Believe me, the buck stops here, but I am convinced that this
is the way forward for our country in war and peace, at home and abroad.
>
> I thank you for your time and attention. Goodnight and God bless America.
>
> Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation
Institute's TomDispatch.com    Must-visit websites on the Afghan War include
Juan Cole's Informed Comment, Antiwar.com, the War in Context, Rethink
Afghanistan, and the Af/Pak Channel's invaluable Daily Brief
>

Here's a great little article about the upcoming issuance of US foreign policy
by our POTUS on Tuesday.

  http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175141



               During the presidential campaign I called Afghanistan "the right
war." Let me say this: with the full information resources of the American
presidency at my fingertips, I no longer believe that to be the case. I no
longer believe that to be the case....



And the best information available to me on the situation in Afghanistan is
sobering. It doesn't matter whether you are listening to our war commander,
General Stanley McChrystal, who, as press reports have indicated, believes that
with approximately 80,000 more troops -- which we essentially don't have
available -- there would be a reasonable chance of conducting a successful
counterinsurgency war against the Taliban, or our ambassador to that country,
Karl Eikenberry, a former general with significant experience there, who
believes we shouldn't send another soldier at present. All agree on the
following seven points:

1. We have no partner in Afghanistan. The control of the government of Afghan
President Hamid Karzai hardly extends beyond the embattled capital of Kabul. He
himself has just been returned to office in a presidential election in which
voting fraud on an almost unimaginably large scale was the order of the day. His
administration is believed to have lost all credibility with the Afghan people.

2. Afghanistan floats in a culture of corruption. This includes President
Karzai's administration up to its highest levels and also the warlords who
control various areas and, like the Taliban insurgency, are to some degree
dependent for their financing on opium, which the country produces in staggering
quantities. Afghanistan, in fact, is not only a narco-state, but the leading
narco-state on the planet.

3. Despite billions of dollars of American money poured into training the Afghan
security forces, the army is notoriously understrength and largely ineffective;
the police forces are riddled with corruption and held in contempt by most of
the populace.

4. The Taliban insurgency is spreading and gaining support largely because the
Karzai regime has been so thoroughly discredited, the Afghan police and courts
are so ineffective and corrupt, and reconstruction funds so badly misspent.
Under these circumstances, American and NATO forces increasingly look like an
army of occupation, and more of them are only likely to solidify this
impression.

5. Al-Qaeda is no longer a significant factor in Afghanistan. The best
intelligence available to me indicates -- and again, whatever their
disagreements, all my advisors agree on this -- that there may be perhaps 100
al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan and another 300 in neighboring Pakistan. As I
said in March, our goal has been to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda in
Pakistan and Afghanistan, and on this we have, especially recently, been
successful. Osama bin Laden, of course, remains at large, and his terrorist
organization is still a danger to us, but not a $100 billion-plus danger.

6. Our war in Afghanistan has become the military equivalent of a massive
bail-out of a firm determined to fail. Simply to send another 40,000 troops to
Afghanistan would, my advisors estimate, cost $40-$54 billion extra dollars;
eighty thousand troops, more than $80 billion. Sending more trainers and
advisors in an effort to double the size of the Afghan security forces, as many
have suggested, would cost another estimated $10 billion a year. These figures
are over and above the present projected annual costs of the war -- $65 billion
-- and would ensure that the American people will be spending $100 billion a
year or more on this war, probably for years to come. Simply put, this is not
money we can afford to squander on a failing war thousands of miles from home.

7. Our all-volunteer military has for years now shouldered the burden of our two
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if we were capable of sending 40,000-80,000
more troops to Afghanistan, they would without question be servicepeople on
their second, third, fourth, or even fifth tours of duty. A military, even the
best in the world, wears down under this sort of stress and pressure.

These seven points have been weighing on my mind over the last weeks as we've
deliberated on the right course to take. Tonight, in response to the realities
of Afghanistan as I've just described them to you, I've put aside all the
subjects that ordinarily obsess Washington, especially whether an American
president can reverse the direction of a war and still have an electoral future.
That's for the American people, and them alone, to decide.

Given that, let me say as bluntly as I can that I have decided to send no more
troops to Afghanistan. Beyond that, I believe it is in the national interest of
the American people that this war, like the Iraq War, be drawn down. Over time,
our troops and resources will be brought home in an orderly fashion, while we
ensure that we provide adequate security for the men and women of our Armed
Forces. Ours will be an administration that will stand or fall, as of today, on
this essential position: that we ended, rather than extended, two wars.

This will, of course, take time. But I have already instructed Ambassador
Eikenberry and Special Representative Holbrooke to begin discussions, however
indirectly, with the Taliban insurgents for a truce in place. Before year's end,
I plan to call an international conference of interested countries, including
key regional partners, to help work out a way to settle this conflict. I will,
in addition, soon announce a schedule for the withdrawal of the first American
troops from Afghanistan.

For the counterinsurgency war that we now will not fight, there is already a
path laid out. We walked down that well-mined path once in recent American
memory and we know where it leads. For ending the war in another way, there is
no precedent in our recent history and so no path -- only the unknown. But there
is hope. Let me try to explain.

Recently, comparisons between the Vietnam War and our current conflict in
Afghanistan have been legion. Let me, however, suggest a major difference
between the two. When Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson faced their
crises involving sending more troops into Vietnam, they and their advisors had
little to rely on in the American record. They, in a sense, faced the darkness
of the unknown as they made their choices. The same is not true of us.

In the White House, for instance, a number of us have been reading a book on how
the U.S. got itself ever more disastrously involved in the Vietnam War. We have
history to guide us here. We know what happens in counterinsurgency campaigns.
We have the experience of Vietnam as a landmark on the trail behind us. And if
that weren't enough, of course, we have the path to defeat already well cleared
by the Russians in their Afghan fiasco of the 1980s, when they had just as many
troops in the field as we would have if I had chosen to send those extra 40,000
Americans. That is the known.

On the other hand, peering down the path of de-escalation, all we can see is
darkness. Nothing like this has been tried before in Washington. But I firmly
believe that this, too, is deeply in the American grain. American immigrants, as
well as slaves, traveled to this country as if into the darkness of the unknown.
Americans have long braved the unknown in all sorts of ways.

To present this more formulaically, if we sent the troops and trainers to
Afghanistan, if we increased air strikes and tried to strengthen the Afghan
Army, we basically know how things are likely to work out: not well. The war is
likely to spread. The insurgents, despite many losses, are likely to grow in
strength. Hatred of Americans is likely to increase. Pakistan is likely to
become more destabilized.

If, however, we don't take such steps and proceed down that other path, we do
not know how things will work out in Afghanistan, or how well.

We do not know how things will work out in Pakistan, or how well.

That is hardly surprising, since we do not know what it means to end such a war
now.

But we must not be scared. America will not -- of this, as your president, I am
convinced -- be a safer nation if it spends many hundreds of billions of dollars
over many years, essentially bankrupting itself and exhausting its military on
what looks increasingly like an unwinnable war. This is not the way to safety,
but to national penury -- and I am unwilling to preside over an America heading
in that direction.

Let me say again that the unknown path, the path into the wilderness, couldn't
be more American. We have always been willing to strike out for ourselves where
others would not go. That, too, is in the best American tradition.

It is, of course, a perilous thing to predict the future, but in the
Afghanistan/Pakistan region, war has visibly only spread war. The beginning of a
negotiated peace may have a similarly powerful effect, but in the opposite
direction. It may actually take the wind out of the sails of the insurgents on
both sides of the Afghan/Pakistan border. It may actually encourage forces in
both countries with which we might be more comfortable to step to the fore.

Certainly, we will do our best to lead the way with any aid or advice we can
offer toward a future peaceful Afghanistan and a future peaceful Pakistan. In
the meantime, I plan to ask Congress to take some of the savings from our two
wars winding down and put them into a genuine jobs program for the American
people.

We cannot afford a failing war in Afghanistan and a 10.2% official unemployment
rate at home. We cannot live with two Americas, one for Wall Street and one for
everyone else. This is not the path to American safety.

It's time for change. I know that not all Americans will agree with me and that
some will be upset by the approach I am now determined to follow. I expect anger
and debate. I take full responsibility for whatever may result from this policy
departure. Believe me, the buck stops here, but I am convinced that this is the
way forward for our country in war and peace, at home and abroad.

I thank you for your time and attention. Goodnight and God bless America.

Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation
Institute's TomDispatch.com    Must-visit websites on the Afghan War include
Juan Cole's Informed Comment, Antiwar.com, the War in Context, Rethink
Afghanistan, and the Af/Pak Channel's invaluable Daily Brief

CO2 levels shoot off chart as important climate talks approach.  How can you
people deny this?  It's a factual reality.

By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009


MAUNA LOA OBSERVATORY, Hawaii -- The readings at this 2-mile-high station show
an upward curve as the world counts down to climate talks: Global warming gases
have built up to record levels in the atmosphere, from emissions that match
scientists' worst-case scenarios.

Carbon dioxide concentrations this fall are hovering at around 385 parts per
million, on their way to a near-certain record high above 390 in the first half
of next year, at the annual peak.

"For the past million years we've never seen 390. You have to wonder what that's
going to do," said physicist John Barnes, the observatory director.

One leading atmospheric scientist, Stephen Schneider, sees "coin-flip odds for
serious outcomes for our planet."

Far from this mid-Pacific government observatory, negotiators from 192 nations
gather in Copenhagen, Denmark, next month to try to agree on steps to head off
the worst of the climate disruptions researchers say will result if
concentrations hit around 450 parts per million -- in 30 years at the current
rate. Some say the world has already passed a danger point, at 350 ppm, and must
roll back.

What I don't understand is why people are against reducing pollution?

I'm not smart enough to conduct the numerous studies that have been completed
and whose results have been duplicated over and over by the thousands of
climatologists and other scientists who are advising the population of this
planet that human caused pollution is creating an increase in the current phase
of global warming that will create huge problems for the species of this earth
(including humans).  However, I also believe the scientific community when they
say that asprin will treat a headache.

Why are you people who argue against the ideas of human caused global warming so
up the anus of the oil and gas industry?

If the true costs of the production and sale of oil, coal and other hydrocarbons
were built into the cost of the product, it would be far more expensive.  The
government provides huge assistance to these polluting industries, including
waging war on these companies behalf, and that cost is also borne by taxpayers
and NOT the industries who mine, drill or process and deliver these products to
consumers.

You so-called conservatives who want to prevent the transition to a solar
economy and reject the notion that the extractive industries which have put this
planet's ability to serve as a viable ecosystem that can support human existence
are more liberal than any people on this planet!

You support government subsidies for oil, coal and nuclear industries.  This is
a liberal idea.  A TRUE conservative would be for the elimination of the
government subsidies for these extractive industries, STARTING with the complete
and immediate withdrawal of all troops from the military conflicts in
Afghanistan and Iraq.

The only reason we're there is because the oil is there.  The US wouldn't give a
rats ass if some tribal pukes were screwing their daughters and killing their
wives (just as they don't anywhere else on the planet) if it weren't for the
oil.

You people who claim to be conservatives and still support the US government's
subidization of these extractive industries lack any moral standing.

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@...> wrote:
>
> Please provide factual documentation for your assertions.
>
> Roy
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> >
> > decrease artic ice is a lie.
> > the entire northern hemisphere used to be under ice.
> > it melted.
> > the entire area under Canada was under ice.
> > it melted.
> > Canada is mostly free from glaciers due to over 20 thousand years of
melting.
> >
> > find out what happened to all those glaciers before you start to say that
200 years of industrialization and 100 years of cars did anything.
> >
> > go back 10 years and you will find we are way colder now.
> >
> > if it was man caused, if man were in any way involved, we have not only
solved the problem, we have gone way too far and now man caused the earth to
head into a glacial state.
> >
> > Seems that to prevent that from happening, we need Al Gore to drive his
caravan of SUV's around for days on end.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> > >
> > > It's not hardly one of the coldest years on record.
> > >
> > > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html
> > >
> > > One of many things that's lost on the science deniers is that minimum
temperatures, as well as maximum temperatures are part of climate.  If maximums
don't particularly rise, but minimums do, the climate is actually getting
warmer.  One place it shows up is decreased Arctic ice.
> > >
> > > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentslc.html
> > >
> > > Roy
> > >
> > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > how come is it that ranting about man caused global warming in the
coldest year in a decade, one of the coldest years on record, is called
'science' but when someone points out that people are fudging numbers to pretend
it is much hotter than it really is, they are called bogus ?
> > > >
> > > > It that some altenate universe were scinece is an extension of politics
and follows the money ?
> > > >
> > > > I prefer the real universe where facts are the rule of the day.
> > > >
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to
support his bogus claims:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

An old sailorman's measure: "If it looks right, it'll sail right".

Neither Mr. Beck, Mr. Limbaugh nor My Lord Monckton SOUND right.  But that, of
course, is because we, the listeners, are, oh, so mistaken. We have (some of us)
bought into the idea that they are purveyors  of knowledge.  More fools we. 
These men are simply knaves and jesters in the court of reason. Throw them a
bone, but make sure YOU know, as you throw it, what is bone and what is meat.

Sam



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@...> wrote:
>
> If Glenn is your measure, then we need to heed Lord Monckton as not only the
most fair and knowledgeable person, but one who asks the hard questions from all
comers.  Using Glenn as the Standard and putting Lord Monckton at that high a
level would seem to run contrary to your earlier post.
>
> I might be persuaded that you have not listened to Glenn Beck and would not
know that he uses facts and history to support his assertions.
>
> I am very well aware that his detractors have to lie and mislead in order to
slander him.
>
> I am now uncertain if you truly know Lord Monckton, or maybe just used an
inappropriate figure as a comparison ?
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> >
> > The facts I set forth do indeed have to do with the "facts" Lord Monckton
set forth.  The facts I set forth indicate that Lord Monckton's assertions
should be approached with the greatest scepticism, scepticism as great as that
one must apply to the assertions of, say, Glen Beck.
>

Just testing you ;-0)!  Have you decided what to do about your cleaning problem?

Sam

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@...> wrote:
>
> Sam, afraid my german is minimal. I do live here, my wife works as a civilian
for the U.S. Army.
>
> --- x <lesleynward@...> schrieb am Mi, 25.11.2009:
>
> Von: x <lesleynward@...>
> Betreff: [7x10minilathe] Re: cleaning diamond compound
> An: 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com
> Datum: Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, 21:01
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       No, I'm sorry if I implied that.  Cleaning, as such, will depend on the
nature and the gravity of the situation.  As an example: When I came back to our
building after having been displaced for six weeks after a fire in the early
part of the year, my beloved tablesaw (cast iron top) was the colour of milk
chocolate due to the moisture in the building resulting from about two million
gallons of water having been put through the far end of the building from my
shop in order to kill the fire. Solid water got nowhere near the saw.
>
>
>
> The remedy, in that case, was to grasp my antique Black & Decker 4" belt
sander and abrade the table top till clean metal came through.  Extreme,
admittedly, but effective and permissible since woodwork does not require the
planeness of, say, a surface plate. After this dry abrasion with an ordinary
flint paper belt I hand-sanded the table with "Wet'n'Dry" of increasingly finer
grit till I was satisfied.  The lubricant for the paper was WD40 which in such a
situation acts rather like cutting fluid.
>
>
>
> As James E has said, the MEREST suggestion of water vapour in the air will set
off unprotected cast iron.  It has been my practice for years to apply a light
coat of WD40 to tools as soon as I clean them, though of course you need to do
it with some discernment. Cleaning, say, a micrometer requires a more delicate
approach than cleaning, say, a chisel. I also like my bench grinder fitted with
a FINE wire wheel on one end and a buffing pad on the other for many purposes.
For REALLY fine work you might try an electric rotating toothbrush impregnated
with either "Silvo" or "Brasso".  Those substances are just fine grit in
suspension in a fluid carrier.  The carrier is slightly acid so if you use them,
flush with water and liquid detergent, then with plain water or even methylated
spirits which "marries" perfectly with water and therefore takes the water with
it when it is removed. Then apply WD40 which name, legend has it, stands for
"Water Displacement
>  formula number 40".  Whether that is true of not, the stuff really does seem
to displace SMALL amounts of residual water moisture.
>
>
>
> Also, du wohnst in Deutschland?  Was ist's für Dinge du reinmachen müssen? 
Sagst du mir das, denn könne ich dir vielleicht besser hilfen :-)
>
>
>
> Sam
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ ...>
wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Sam, are you saying to apply the WD 40 before cleaning?
>
> >
>
> > --- x xx <lesleynward@ ...> schrieb am Mi, 25.11.2009:
>
> >
>
> > Von: x xx <lesleynward@ ...>
>
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
>
> > Datum: Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, 16:00
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >       My own experience is that WD40 does a fine job.  It seems as if the
carrier in the stuff evaporates fairly quickly but not before the "grease" it
carries sinks into the pores of the metal so that repeated (periodic)
applications of the Magic Fix-it Fluid results in a nice prophylactic. So to
speak.
>
> >  
>
> > Sam. 
>
> >
>
> > --- On Wed, 11/25/09, James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net>
>
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> > To: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
>
> > Received: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 6:51 AM
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  
>
> >
>
> > Cast iron cleaned of all oil will begin rusting in seconds unless there is
>
> > some form of rust preventative like soap scum on the metal surface to slow
>
> > the process down. Any metal cleaned of all oils will tarnish, rust or
>
> > corrode rather quickly if some form of oil or wax is not applied to halt or
>
> > slow the process.
>
> >
>
> > JWE
>
> > Long Beach, CA
>
> >
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
> > From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
>
> > To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 1:43 AM
>
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> >
>
> > James, the rust spots occured
>
> >  within minutes, thus my question about a rust
>
> > preventative to add, Kent
>
> >
>
> > --- James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
>
> >
>
> > Von: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net>
>
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
>
> > Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:55
>
> >
>
> > Strong soap and lots of water to rinse is the only effective way to
>
> > remove
>
> >
>
> > lapping compound
>
> >  period. But then to stop rusting or any other form of
>
> >
>
> > corrosion you need to dip the part in oil and rub it into the surface to
>
> >
>
> > prevent rust. So it is a two step process of soap & water to remove the
>
> >
>
> > compound and then oil to prevent corrosion of the part.
>
> >
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
> >
>
> > From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
>
> >
>
> > To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
>
> >
>
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:40 AM
>
> >
>
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> >
>
> > What I am polishing are very small pieces., some complex and I must get all
>
> >
>
> > the compound off before going on to the next smaller compound. I usually use
>
> >
>
> > an artist brush to clean with. don't think wiping is sufficient nor even
>
> >
>
> > possible in some places.
>
> >
>
> > --- James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
>
> >
>
> > Von: James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet .
>
> >  att.net>
>
> >
>
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> >
>
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
>
> >
>
> > Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:11
>
> >
>
> > Just wipe the area with any light lube oil of even WD-40 as your
>
> >
>
> > cleaner removes all oil allowing things to rust. So most any form of light
>
> >
>
> > lubricating oil after the cleaning will prevent rust.
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> >
>
> > JWE
>
> >
>
> > Long Beach, CA
>
> >
>
> > Don't handicap your children by
>
> >
>
> > making their lives easy.
>
> >
>
> > Robert A. Heinlein
>
> >
>
> > ------------ -- Original message ------------ --------- -
>
> >
>
> > From: Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I am not satisfied with cleanup from one compound to another. Been just
>
> >
>
> > > using
>
> >
>
> > > water with a little dish washing liquid. Tried heating it up but that
>
> >
>
> > > encouraged
>
> >
>
> > > rust spots. Any suggestions for a rust preventative or a better
>
> >  cleaner?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
>
> >
>
> > Do You Yahoo!?
>
> >
>
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz
>
> >
>
> > gegen Massenmails.
>
> >
>
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
>
> >
>
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
>
> > Do You Yahoo!?
>
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz
>
> > gegen Massenmails.
>
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >       Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to
Yahoo! Answers.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
>
> > Do You Yahoo!?
>
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz gegen Massenmails.
>
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

I have absolutely no idea of the provenance of mine.  It is at least as old as I
am, so that would make it about 3,400 years :-)

It is not a great saw. But it's a LOVELY saw :-) For my purposes at the present
time, it is exactly right and easy to work.  It's an odd thing - and I need to
watch myself - I'm absolutely comfortable with any operation on this saw and
have none of the anxieties when using it that I have when using big industrial
machines.  So using this machine I have nothing to fear but the ABSENSE of fear
:-)

On many machines a coat of "Simonize" is good, but you need to be mindful of
what sort of work you are going to be doing for whatever you use, it will
transfer to the work and possibly disturb the finish on the work.  So the answer
is to think ahead.  For cuts that will be finish coated without further ado the
rust prophylactic need to be compatible with the material used for finishing. 
Teak makes life simple because it is (usually) finished with oil or wax. 
Mahogany intended for french-polishing takes a different approach.



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, warren hughes <ofujunkcy@...> wrote:
>
> I have a very old craftsman table aw and it was my dads. He would use good
wax on it when done using it it is still in great shape. He bought it in the
fifties.Warren Hughes 
>
> --- On Wed, 11/25/09, x <lesleynward@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: x <lesleynward@...>
> Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: cleaning diamond compound
> To: 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 1:01 PM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> No, I'm sorry if I implied that. Cleaning, as such, will depend on the nature
and the gravity of the situation. As an example: When I came back to our
building after having been displaced for six weeks after a fire in the early
part of the year, my beloved tablesaw (cast iron top) was the colour of milk
chocolate due to the moisture in the building resulting from about two million
gallons of water having been put through the far end of the building from my
shop in order to kill the fire. Solid water got nowhere near the saw.
>
> The remedy, in that case, was to grasp my antique Black & Decker 4" belt
sander and abrade the table top till clean metal came through. Extreme,
admittedly, but effective and permissible since woodwork does not require the
planeness of, say, a surface plate. After this dry abrasion with an ordinary
flint paper belt I hand-sanded the table with "Wet'n'Dry" of increasingly finer
grit till I was satisfied. The lubricant for the paper was WD40 which in such a
situation acts rather like cutting fluid.
>
> As James E has said, the MEREST suggestion of water vapour in the air will set
off unprotected cast iron. It has been my practice for years to apply a light
coat of WD40 to tools as soon as I clean them, though of course you need to do
it with some discernment. Cleaning, say, a micrometer requires a more delicate
approach than cleaning, say, a chisel. I also like my bench grinder fitted with
a FINE wire wheel on one end and a buffing pad on the other for many purposes.
For REALLY fine work you might try an electric rotating toothbrush impregnated
with either "Silvo" or "Brasso". Those substances are just fine grit in
suspension in a fluid carrier. The carrier is slightly acid so if you use them,
flush with water and liquid detergent, then with plain water or even methylated
spirits which "marries" perfectly with water and therefore takes the water with
it when it is removed. Then apply WD40 which name, legend has it, stands for
"Water Displacement
>  formula number 40". Whether that is true of not, the stuff really does seem
to displace SMALL amounts of residual water moisture.
>
> Also, du wohnst in Deutschland? Was ist's für Dinge du reinmachen müssen?
Sagst du mir das, denn könne ich dir vielleicht besser hilfen :-)
>
> Sam
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ ...>
wrote:
> >
> > Sam, are you saying to apply the WD 40 before cleaning?
> >
> > --- x xx <lesleynward@ ...> schrieb am Mi, 25.11.2009:
> >
> > Von: x xx <lesleynward@ ...>
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> > Datum: Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, 16:00
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > My own experience is that WD40 does a fine job.  It seems as if the
carrier in the stuff evaporates fairly quickly but not before the "grease" it
carries sinks into the pores of the metal so that repeated (periodic)
applications of the Magic Fix-it Fluid results in a nice prophylactic. So to
speak.
> >  
> > Sam. 
> >
> > --- On Wed, 11/25/09, James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net>
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> > To: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> > Received: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 6:51 AM
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > Cast iron cleaned of all oil will begin rusting in seconds unless there is
> > some form of rust preventative like soap scum on the metal surface to slow
> > the process down. Any metal cleaned of all oils will tarnish, rust or
> > corrode rather quickly if some form of oil or wax is not applied to halt or
> > slow the process.
> >
> > JWE
> > Long Beach, CA
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
> > To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 1:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> >
> > James, the rust spots occured
> > within minutes, thus my question about a rust
> > preventative to add, Kent
> >
> > --- James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
> >
> > Von: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net>
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> > Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:55
> >
> > Strong soap and lots of water to rinse is the only effective way to
> > remove
> >
> > lapping compound
> > period. But then to stop rusting or any other form of
> >
> > corrosion you need to dip the part in oil and rub it into the surface to
> >
> > prevent rust. So it is a two step process of soap & water to remove the
> >
> > compound and then oil to prevent corrosion of the part.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
> >
> > To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
> >
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:40 AM
> >
> > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> >
> > What I am polishing are very small pieces., some complex and I must get all
> >
> > the compound off before going on to the next smaller compound. I usually use
> >
> > an artist brush to clean with. don't think wiping is sufficient nor even
> >
> > possible in some places.
> >
> > --- James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
> >
> > Von: James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet .
> > att.net>
> >
> > Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> >
> > An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> >
> > Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:11
> >
> > Just wipe the area with any light lube oil of even WD-40 as your
> >
> > cleaner removes all oil allowing things to rust. So most any form of light
> >
> > lubricating oil after the cleaning will prevent rust.
> >
> > --
> >
> > JWE
> >
> > Long Beach, CA
> >
> > Don't handicap your children by
> >
> > making their lives easy.
> >
> > Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> > ------------ -- Original message ------------ --------- -
> >
> > From: Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I am not satisfied with cleanup from one compound to another. Been just
> >
> > > using
> >
> > > water with a little dish washing liquid. Tried heating it up but that
> >
> > > encouraged
> >
> > > rust spots. Any suggestions for a rust preventative or a better
> > cleaner?
> >
> > >
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
> >
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> >
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz
> >
> > gegen Massenmails.
> >
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz
> > gegen Massenmails.
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo!
Answers.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden
Schutz gegen Massenmails.
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
> >
>

If Glenn is your measure, then we need to heed Lord Monckton as not only the
most fair and knowledgeable person, but one who asks the hard questions from all
comers.  Using Glenn as the Standard and putting Lord Monckton at that high a
level would seem to run contrary to your earlier post.

I might be persuaded that you have not listened to Glenn Beck and would not know
that he uses facts and history to support his assertions.

I am very well aware that his detractors have to lie and mislead in order to
slander him.

I am now uncertain if you truly know Lord Monckton, or maybe just used an
inappropriate figure as a comparison ?

Dave



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@...> wrote:
>
> The facts I set forth do indeed have to do with the "facts" Lord Monckton set
forth.  The facts I set forth indicate that Lord Monckton's assertions should be
approached with the greatest scepticism, scepticism as great as that one must
apply to the assertions of, say, Glen Beck.

The alleged cherry picking was to provide a quick rebuttal to a bogus statement
about "coldest year on record."  To show the fallacy of that statement, it's
logical to use annual data; there's no attempt to show a trend.

Roy

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "GadgetBuilder" <jjmoran@...> wrote:
>
> Roy, you're cherry picking your facts.
>
> You've previously maintained that you only consider 30 year averages but here
you look at the VERY short term of one year.  But, when looking at the chart you
reference, it is clear that recently the temperature peaked and is now declining
- so it makes sense that this year's temperature would be near that recent peak.
>
> Your site on Arctic ice ignores the fact that polar ice is actually increasing
when you consider both poles -  Antacrctic ice has been increasing fairly
steadily plus, Arctic ice seems to be recovering from the 2007 low point at a
fair clip.
> http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_4CE_PolarIceCaps.htm#arct
>
> If maximum temperatures don't rise and minimum temperatures do rise then sure
enough, the average temperature rises.  There are two possible inter-related
causes.  The UHI (Urban Heat Island) effect causes temperatures recorded near or
in cities to display this effect - it is common knowledge that cities are warmer
than suburbs just based on watching your car thermometer while driving through a
city;  this has effect been recognized in peer reviewed papers.  This effect has
been emphasized (perhaps deliberately) in recent years by a dramatic reduction
in the number of ground based temperature stations, where the majority of this
reduction has been in high altitude stations located far from population
centers.
>
> Of course, this can be corrected:
> http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif 
Surprisingly, as the percentage of UHI affected stations increases, the
"correction" becomes more positive - opposite of what one might expect.  And,
the "correction" is about the size of the change in temperature. Plus, the
corrections more or less stopped once satellite data became available to cross
check against.
>
> The satellite temperatures are relatively recent so they cover a shorter
period but differ from the ground based measurements:
> <
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/mean:1/offset/from:1980/plot/rss/from:1980/\
to:1990/trend/plot/rss/from:1990/to:2000/trend/plot/rss/from:2000/to:2010/trend/\
plot/hadsst2gl/from:1980/mean:1/scale:1 >
>
> Then, there is the recent ClimateGate stuff that calls much of the ground
based measurements and their processing into question:
> http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.shtml
>
> One can select information to support most any view on AGW - the better idea
is to look at the underlying data and form your own opinion rather than assuming
that the data and talking points someone selects for you lead to an unbiased
conclusion.
>
> John
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> >
> > It's not hardly one of the coldest years on record.
> >
> > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html
> >
> > One of many things that's lost on the science deniers is that minimum
temperatures, as well as maximum temperatures are part of climate.  If maximums
don't particularly rise, but minimums do, the climate is actually getting
warmer.  One place it shows up is decreased Arctic ice.
> >
> > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentslc.html
> >
> > Roy
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > how come is it that ranting about man caused global warming in the coldest
year in a decade, one of the coldest years on record, is called 'science' but
when someone points out that people are fudging numbers to pretend it is much
hotter than it really is, they are called bogus ?
> > >
> > > It that some altenate universe were scinece is an extension of politics
and follows the money ?
> > >
> > > I prefer the real universe where facts are the rule of the day.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to
support his bogus claims:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Some of the cleaning solutions contain rust inhibitors.

http://www.omegasonics.com/industrial/chemistry.shtml

Roy


--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@...> wrote:
>
> Roy I have a professional untrasonic by Ney, but still think I need to 
protect from rust as it automatically heats up the solution just by it's action.
>
> --- roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...> schrieb am Mi, 25.11.2009:
>
> Von: roylowenthal <roylowenthal@...>
> Betreff: [7x10minilathe] Re: cleaning diamond compound
> An: 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com
> Datum: Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, 3:46
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       You probably need a more thorough cleaning method; ultrasonic cleaning
is the usual method of choice for complex parts.  You'll need a real one, not
one of the toys retailed for jewelry cleaning.
>
>
>
> Roy
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ ...>
wrote:
>
> >
>
> > I am not satisfied with cleanup from one compound to another. Been just
using water with a little dish washing liquid. Tried heating it up but that
encouraged rust spots. Any suggestions for a rust preventative or a better
cleaner?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
>
> > Do You Yahoo!?
>
> > Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
gegen Massenmails.
>
> > http://mail. yahoo.com
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

A few facts:

http://csmres.jmu.edu/geollab/fichter/PlateTect/heathistory.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient

Roy

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@...> wrote:
>
> the sun produces most of the heat on the planet.
> the pull of the moon and sun rip the planet and create friction that adds to
the earths temperature.
>
> remove the sun and the earth would run towards absolute zero in a few hours.
>
> yes, the internal temperature would have some effect, but one would have to
drill a mile down to get past the permafrost to find that heat without the sun.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> >
> > Guess you never learned geology!  Take some time to study basic Earth
Science to figure out why the Earth's core is molten.  Once you've done that,
calculate what surface temperature would be without the sun.  AFTER you've done
that, re-evaluate your post.
> >
> > Roy
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I wonder why I am like the smartest person on the planet.  the SUN is in a
period of low sunspot activity.  the Earth is similarly in a low temperature.
> > >
> > > Space is near absolute zero and we would be too, without the sun.
> > >
> > > The sun, the sun, the sun.... the sun !
> > >
> > > Like, me, the sun is bout the brightest thing around !
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well the word is now out and creeping around the world because the
liberal
> > > > controlled media is trying their very best to hide it. AGW was entirely
> > > > false and promoted to a world that was rapidly cooling off potentially
into
> > > > a new ice age to take over the US and several European governments
before we
> > > > drop into either a little or full ice age in the next dozen years. So
the
> > > > entire AGW pogrom was nothing but a political ploy funded and directed
by
> > > > David Rockefeller to seize political control of the western world as his
> > > > family has tried to do for well more than 100 years now.
> > > > \
> > > >
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-cr\
iminals-pjm-exclusive/
> > > >
> > > > JWE
> > > > Long Beach, CA
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
> > > > To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:14 PM
> > > > Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: More government takeovers OT: golbal
wqarming
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Alternate, equally valid hypothesis:  "Solar cycle 24 got off to a
slow
> > > > > start, has been going like gangbusters since 2010."  I actually have
no
> > > > > idea what it's going to do in the next few years, it's not as rigidly
> > > > > periodic as it's usually presented.
> > > > >
> > > > >
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=sunspot-act\
ivity-ramping-up-out-of-2009-07-06
> > > > >
> > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
> > > > >
> > > > > Roy
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@>
wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Roy
> > > > >> That chart is only accurate up until it hits the bottom and the
predicted
> > > > >> future prediction was higher than the last cycle 5 years ago and as
the
> > > > >> sun
> > > > >> has remained in an extreme minimum they have gradually reduced the
> > > > >> predicted
> > > > >> line. The predicted sequence 5 years ago was a peak of 150 spots per
day
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> over the last 5 years they have gradually reduced that number to
about 60
> > > > >> spots a day. As the sun is in the lowest activity level ever recorded
it
> > > > >> will be very interesting to see if they ever get it down to the
current
> > > > >> level of 1 to 2 spots a month which is well below that of the Dalton
or
> > > > >> Maunder minimums which never got that low. The liberal democrats need
to
> > > > >> keep the people frightened of burning to death in the near future
from
> > > > >> global warming when the real truth is closer to millions freezing to
> > > > >> death
> > > > >> in northern climates as we enter into a minimum of 50 to 60 years of
at
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> minimum a little ice age similar to that which we exited some 300
years
> > > > >> ago
> > > > >> and maybe a full ice age like we exited some 13,000 years ago.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The real problem is liberal minds are not able to comprehend just how
> > > > >> radically the climate of the planets can be varied by our very
variable
> > > > >> sun.
> > > > >> And this is why nations get into serious problems when they allow
liberal
> > > > >> minds to have the decision authority in society or in education.
Liberal
> > > > >> minds just do not have the capacity to deal with all the variables
that
> > > > >> need
> > > > >> to be dealt with in making these complex decisions and so they end up
> > > > >> improving their financial status while letting the society crash
> > > > >> unprepared
> > > > >> for problems conservative minds had seen coming for many years.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JWE
> > > > >> Long Beach, CA
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Please provide factual documentation for your assertions.

Roy

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@...> wrote:
>
> decrease artic ice is a lie.
> the entire northern hemisphere used to be under ice.
> it melted.
> the entire area under Canada was under ice.
> it melted.
> Canada is mostly free from glaciers due to over 20 thousand years of melting.
>
> find out what happened to all those glaciers before you start to say that 200
years of industrialization and 100 years of cars did anything.
>
> go back 10 years and you will find we are way colder now.
>
> if it was man caused, if man were in any way involved, we have not only solved
the problem, we have gone way too far and now man caused the earth to head into
a glacial state.
>
> Seems that to prevent that from happening, we need Al Gore to drive his
caravan of SUV's around for days on end.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> >
> > It's not hardly one of the coldest years on record.
> >
> > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html
> >
> > One of many things that's lost on the science deniers is that minimum
temperatures, as well as maximum temperatures are part of climate.  If maximums
don't particularly rise, but minimums do, the climate is actually getting
warmer.  One place it shows up is decreased Arctic ice.
> >
> > http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentslc.html
> >
> > Roy
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > how come is it that ranting about man caused global warming in the coldest
year in a decade, one of the coldest years on record, is called 'science' but
when someone points out that people are fudging numbers to pretend it is much
hotter than it really is, they are called bogus ?
> > >
> > > It that some altenate universe were scinece is an extension of politics
and follows the money ?
> > >
> > > I prefer the real universe where facts are the rule of the day.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to
support his bogus claims:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

The facts I set forth do indeed have to do with the "facts" Lord Monckton set
forth.  The facts I set forth indicate that Lord Monckton's assertions should be
approached with the greatest scepticism, scepticism as great as that one must
apply to the assertions of, say, Glen Beck.

Lord Monckton is a scribe manqué, not a climatologist.  He has no training in
that field as he has none in economics.  That he is an opportunist, which I said
he is, is to be expected given his background and barely merits notice, though
it is, of course, evidenced by his rise through the Conservative Party of
England.

Pay attention to what YOU may observe in the environment, not to what the likes
of Lord Moncton would prefer, for his own nefarious purposes, that you observe.

You might like to know that he is a con-man also in his private life:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Aristocrat-admits-tale-of-lost.3340554.\
jp

You might also like to know that "The Scotsman" is a respected paper which would
never hire a dilettante like Lord Monckton even for a cub reporter's position
tho he calls himself a "journalist"

You might further like to know that he is such a laughing stock in England that
he dares not show his face in the House of Lords and attempts to make a virtue
of the consequent necessity for staying well away :-).



Sam


--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "GadgetBuilder" <jjmoran@...> wrote:
>
> My point is that the "facts as you set them out" have nothing to do with the
facts that Moncton put forth.  You have simply avoided whether his information
is true and attacked the man.
>
> This common logical fallacy is a well known ploy used to avoid dealing with 
unpleasant information, one which you continue to use (and even expand on here)
despite its irrelevance being pointed out.
>
> John
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> >
> > My posting was seriously serious.  Lord Moncton is a man who, though his
better judgement should have told him not to, has chosen to make himself a
public figure.  Thus he is fair game.  He has that in common with other people I
named in that posting. The facts are as I've set them out.
> >
> > If you are referring to my characterization of Ronald Reagan, that is
factual too, and he did, regretably, offer himself for public service, thus
rendering himself fair game.  He WAS a B-movie actor until public lack of
perspicacity elevated him to a position above his station and his competence. 
And the Iron Lady IS the daughter of a grocer in a small provincial town of no
distinction. And she did, regretably, offer herself for public service, thus
rendering herself fair game.
> >
> > Thatcher may be fairly accused of suffering from acute false consciousness. 
There are certain impediments to levelling such an accusation  at Reagan.
> >
> > Thatcher, in addition, suffered from the same reflex bellicosity that is so
dominant a trait in all too many Americans.
> >
> > But worry not.  Those people are history.  All we have left to do is remedy
their legacy. We shall do so. The Permanent Revolution marches on :-).
> >
> > And just so you know: I am perfectly aware what "ad hominem" means. The
prohibition you allude to is a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on other
group members.  NOT a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on public figures. 
In fact, IMO, is is you DUTY to flail mercilessly those who offer themselves for
public service.  Tho you must do so in language that would not get you evicted
from my Christmas Open House.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "GadgetBuilder" <jjmoran@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sam,
> > >
> > > Is your post simply an illustration of a nasty "Ad Hominem" or are you
serious?
> > >
> > > http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
> > >
> > > If you can't argue the facts, attack the person...
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We can safely dismiss Chris Moncton and cock a snoot at his title.  He
is a laughing stock everywhere being but a nasty piece of public school
educated, inky fingered scribe for a minor provincial newspaper, risen to fame,
tho not to real fortune, by riding into the Iron Lady's now discredited
government on the coat tails of his grandpappy's reputation.  Granpappy was the
solicitor (attorney) who advised Edward VIII when he couldn't keep his hands of
Wallis Simpson.  Grandpappy was made a viscount - the first of Benchley - for
his sterling services to the King who gave up his throne for the woman he loved
and who then had to spend the rest of his life, mit Frau, if not in Coventry
which would have been bad enuff, but - gasp - in FRANCE!!
> > > >
> > > > Chris' pappy was a charicature of that charicature we know as "Colonel
Blimp".  He shone in the retreat from France by being speedier than his fleeing
men and was therefore snatched off the beach at Dunkirk in a manner befitting a
gentleman - ahead of the lower orders.  He promptly wangled a posting to some
staff college Stateside and cowered there from 1940 until the fighting in North
Africa was well and truly over, so it was safe for him to accept a posting to
Palestine in '44. Thence he followed the Canadians up through Italy, safely
shielded by them, so he could join his own regiment (an armoured regiment, I
seem to recall, maybe the King's Own) in Germany AFTER she had been conquered
and laid waste.
> > > >
> > > > Chris hisself is as much an expert on climate as the grocer's daughter
from - where was it? - Grantham was on economics. Mind you, she did know as much
as that B-movie actor who nevertheless acted well enough to convince far too
many that he really WAS a POTUS.   Ah, well - we'll get through the consequences
of that fox's pass too.
> > > >
> > > > As for the Viscount of Benchley, he's right up there in the opportunism
department with the vicar of Bray!
> > > >
> > > > You may visit the vicar here:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.stthomasu.ca/~hunt/braytext.htm
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sam
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > A bit of a misinterpretation of the text in the purloined e-mails. 
Here's a little background on Monckton:
> > > > >
> > > > >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Bren\
chley
> > > > >
> > > > >
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/viscount_monckton_denia\
list_dujour/
> > > > >
> > > > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to
support his bogus claims:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/22/105920/61
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't make major investments in snowshoes just yet;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Roy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well the word is now out and creeping around the world because the
liberal
> > > > > > controlled media is trying their very best to hide it. AGW was
entirely
> > > > > > false and promoted to a world that was rapidly cooling off
potentially into
> > > > > > a new ice age to take over the US and several European governments
before we
> > > > > > drop into either a little or full ice age in the next dozen years.
So the
> > > > > > entire AGW pogrom was nothing but a political ploy funded and
directed by
> > > > > > David Rockefeller to seize political control of the western world as
his
> > > > > > family has tried to do for well more than 100 years now.
> > > > > > \
> > > > > >
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-cr\
iminals-pjm-exclusive/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JWE
> > > > > > Long Beach, CA
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
> > > > > > To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:14 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: More government takeovers OT: golbal
wqarming
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alternate, equally valid hypothesis:  "Solar cycle 24 got off to a
slow
> > > > > > > start, has been going like gangbusters since 2010."  I actually
have no
> > > > > > > idea what it's going to do in the next few years, it's not as
rigidly
> > > > > > > periodic as it's usually presented.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=sunspot-act\
ivity-ramping-up-out-of-2009-07-06
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Roy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@>
wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Roy
> > > > > > >> That chart is only accurate up until it hits the bottom and the
predicted
> > > > > > >> future prediction was higher than the last cycle 5 years ago and
as the
> > > > > > >> sun
> > > > > > >> has remained in an extreme minimum they have gradually reduced
the
> > > > > > >> predicted
> > > > > > >> line. The predicted sequence 5 years ago was a peak of 150 spots
per day
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> over the last 5 years they have gradually reduced that number to
about 60
> > > > > > >> spots a day. As the sun is in the lowest activity level ever
recorded it
> > > > > > >> will be very interesting to see if they ever get it down to the
current
> > > > > > >> level of 1 to 2 spots a month which is well below that of the
Dalton or
> > > > > > >> Maunder minimums which never got that low. The liberal democrats
need to
> > > > > > >> keep the people frightened of burning to death in the near future
from
> > > > > > >> global warming when the real truth is closer to millions freezing
to
> > > > > > >> death
> > > > > > >> in northern climates as we enter into a minimum of 50 to 60 years
of at
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> minimum a little ice age similar to that which we exited some 300
years
> > > > > > >> ago
> > > > > > >> and maybe a full ice age like we exited some 13,000 years ago.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> The real problem is liberal minds are not able to comprehend just
how
> > > > > > >> radically the climate of the planets can be varied by our very
variable
> > > > > > >> sun.
> > > > > > >> And this is why nations get into serious problems when they allow
liberal
> > > > > > >> minds to have the decision authority in society or in education.
Liberal
> > > > > > >> minds just do not have the capacity to deal with all the
variables that
> > > > > > >> need
> > > > > > >> to be dealt with in making these complex decisions and so they
end up
> > > > > > >> improving their financial status while letting the society crash
> > > > > > >> unprepared
> > > > > > >> for problems conservative minds had seen coming for many years.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> JWE
> > > > > > >> Long Beach, CA
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

No, I'm sorry if I implied that.  Cleaning, as such, will depend on the nature
and the gravity of the situation.  As an example: When I came back to our
building after having been displaced for six weeks after a fire in the early
part of the year, my beloved tablesaw (cast iron top) was the colour of milk
chocolate due to the moisture in the building resulting from about two million
gallons of water having been put through the far end of the building from my
shop in order to kill the fire. Solid water got nowhere near the saw.

The remedy, in that case, was to grasp my antique Black & Decker 4" belt sander
and abrade the table top till clean metal came through.  Extreme, admittedly,
but effective and permissible since woodwork does not require the planeness of,
say, a surface plate. After this dry abrasion with an ordinary flint paper belt
I hand-sanded the table with "Wet'n'Dry" of increasingly finer grit till I was
satisfied.  The lubricant for the paper was WD40 which in such a situation acts
rather like cutting fluid.

As James E has said, the MEREST suggestion of water vapour in the air will set
off unprotected cast iron.  It has been my practice for years to apply a light
coat of WD40 to tools as soon as I clean them, though of course you need to do
it with some discernment. Cleaning, say, a micrometer requires a more delicate
approach than cleaning, say, a chisel. I also like my bench grinder fitted with
a FINE wire wheel on one end and a buffing pad on the other for many purposes.
For REALLY fine work you might try an electric rotating toothbrush impregnated
with either "Silvo" or "Brasso".  Those substances are just fine grit in
suspension in a fluid carrier.  The carrier is slightly acid so if you use them,
flush with water and liquid detergent, then with plain water or even methylated
spirits which "marries" perfectly with water and therefore takes the water with
it when it is removed. Then apply WD40 which name, legend has it, stands for
"Water Displacement formula number 40".  Whether that is true of not, the stuff
really does seem to displace SMALL amounts of residual water moisture.

Also, du wohnst in Deutschland?  Was ist's für Dinge du reinmachen müssen? 
Sagst du mir das, denn könne ich dir vielleicht besser hilfen :-)

Sam




--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@...> wrote:
>
> Sam, are you saying to apply the WD 40 before cleaning?
>
> --- x xx <lesleynward@...> schrieb am Mi, 25.11.2009:
>
> Von: x xx <lesleynward@...>
> Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> An: 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com
> Datum: Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, 16:00
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       My own experience is that WD40 does a fine job.  It seems as if the
carrier in the stuff evaporates fairly quickly but not before the "grease" it
carries sinks into the pores of the metal so that repeated (periodic)
applications of the Magic Fix-it Fluid results in a nice prophylactic. So to
speak.
>  
> Sam. 
>
> --- On Wed, 11/25/09, James Early <j.w.early@worldnet. att.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet. att.net>
> Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> To: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> Received: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 6:51 AM
>
>
>  
>
> Cast iron cleaned of all oil will begin rusting in seconds unless there is
> some form of rust preventative like soap scum on the metal surface to slow
> the process down. Any metal cleaned of all oils will tarnish, rust or
> corrode rather quickly if some form of oil or wax is not applied to halt or
> slow the process.
>
> JWE
> Long Beach, CA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
> To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 1:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> James, the rust spots occured
>  within minutes, thus my question about a rust
> preventative to add, Kent
>
> --- James Early <j.w.early@worldnet. att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
>
> Von: James Early <j.w.early@worldnet. att.net>
> Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
> An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
> Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:55
>
> Strong soap and lots of water to rinse is the only effective way to
> remove
>
> lapping compound
>  period. But then to stop rusting or any other form of
>
> corrosion you need to dip the part in oil and rub it into the surface to
>
> prevent rust. So it is a two step process of soap & water to remove the
>
> compound and then oil to prevent corrosion of the part.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Kent Dickerson" <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
>
> To: <7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com>
>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:40 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> What I am polishing are very small pieces., some complex and I must get all
>
> the compound off before going on to the next smaller compound. I usually use
>
> an artist brush to clean with. don't think wiping is sufficient nor even
>
> possible in some places.
>
> --- James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet . att.net> schrieb am Di, 24.11.2009:
>
> Von: James W. Early <j.w.early@worldnet .
>  att.net>
>
> Betreff: Re: [7x10minilathe] cleaning diamond compound
>
> An: 7x10minilathe@ yahoogroups. com
>
> Datum: Dienstag, 24. November 2009, 15:11
>
> Just wipe the area with any light lube oil of even WD-40 as your
>
> cleaner removes all oil allowing things to rust. So most any form of light
>
> lubricating oil after the cleaning will prevent rust.
>
> --
>
> JWE
>
> Long Beach, CA
>
> Don't handicap your children by
>
> making their lives easy.
>
> Robert A. Heinlein
>
> ------------ -- Original message ------------ --------- -
>
> From: Kent Dickerson <jadewatch2003@ yahoo.de>
>
> >
>
> > I am not satisfied with cleanup from one compound to another. Been just
>
> > using
>
> > water with a little dish washing liquid. Tried heating it up but that
>
> > encouraged
>
> > rust spots. Any suggestions for a rust preventative or a better
>  cleaner?
>
> >
>
> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
>
> Do You Yahoo!?
>
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
>
> gegen Massenmails.
>
> http://mail. yahoo.com
>
> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
> gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail. yahoo.com
>
>
>
>       Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to
Yahoo! Answers.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz
gegen Massenmails.
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

My point is that the "facts as you set them out" have nothing to do with the
facts that Moncton put forth.  You have simply avoided whether his information
is true and attacked the man.

This common logical fallacy is a well known ploy used to avoid dealing with 
unpleasant information, one which you continue to use (and even expand on here)
despite its irrelevance being pointed out.

John

--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@...> wrote:
>
> My posting was seriously serious.  Lord Moncton is a man who, though his
better judgement should have told him not to, has chosen to make himself a
public figure.  Thus he is fair game.  He has that in common with other people I
named in that posting. The facts are as I've set them out.
>
> If you are referring to my characterization of Ronald Reagan, that is factual
too, and he did, regretably, offer himself for public service, thus rendering
himself fair game.  He WAS a B-movie actor until public lack of perspicacity
elevated him to a position above his station and his competence.  And the Iron
Lady IS the daughter of a grocer in a small provincial town of no distinction.
And she did, regretably, offer herself for public service, thus rendering
herself fair game.
>
> Thatcher may be fairly accused of suffering from acute false consciousness. 
There are certain impediments to levelling such an accusation  at Reagan.
>
> Thatcher, in addition, suffered from the same reflex bellicosity that is so
dominant a trait in all too many Americans.
>
> But worry not.  Those people are history.  All we have left to do is remedy
their legacy. We shall do so. The Permanent Revolution marches on :-).
>
> And just so you know: I am perfectly aware what "ad hominem" means. The
prohibition you allude to is a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on other
group members.  NOT a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on public figures. 
In fact, IMO, is is you DUTY to flail mercilessly those who offer themselves for
public service.  Tho you must do so in language that would not get you evicted
from my Christmas Open House.
>
> Sam
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "GadgetBuilder" <jjmoran@> wrote:
> >
> > Sam,
> >
> > Is your post simply an illustration of a nasty "Ad Hominem" or are you
serious?
> >
> > http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
> >
> > If you can't argue the facts, attack the person...
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> > >
> > > We can safely dismiss Chris Moncton and cock a snoot at his title.  He is
a laughing stock everywhere being but a nasty piece of public school educated,
inky fingered scribe for a minor provincial newspaper, risen to fame, tho not to
real fortune, by riding into the Iron Lady's now discredited government on the
coat tails of his grandpappy's reputation.  Granpappy was the solicitor
(attorney) who advised Edward VIII when he couldn't keep his hands of Wallis
Simpson.  Grandpappy was made a viscount - the first of Benchley - for his
sterling services to the King who gave up his throne for the woman he loved and
who then had to spend the rest of his life, mit Frau, if not in Coventry which
would have been bad enuff, but - gasp - in FRANCE!!
> > >
> > > Chris' pappy was a charicature of that charicature we know as "Colonel
Blimp".  He shone in the retreat from France by being speedier than his fleeing
men and was therefore snatched off the beach at Dunkirk in a manner befitting a
gentleman - ahead of the lower orders.  He promptly wangled a posting to some
staff college Stateside and cowered there from 1940 until the fighting in North
Africa was well and truly over, so it was safe for him to accept a posting to
Palestine in '44. Thence he followed the Canadians up through Italy, safely
shielded by them, so he could join his own regiment (an armoured regiment, I
seem to recall, maybe the King's Own) in Germany AFTER she had been conquered
and laid waste.
> > >
> > > Chris hisself is as much an expert on climate as the grocer's daughter
from - where was it? - Grantham was on economics. Mind you, she did know as much
as that B-movie actor who nevertheless acted well enough to convince far too
many that he really WAS a POTUS.   Ah, well - we'll get through the consequences
of that fox's pass too.
> > >
> > > As for the Viscount of Benchley, he's right up there in the opportunism
department with the vicar of Bray!
> > >
> > > You may visit the vicar here:
> > >
> > > http://www.stthomasu.ca/~hunt/braytext.htm
> > >
> > >
> > > Sam
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A bit of a misinterpretation of the text in the purloined e-mails. 
Here's a little background on Monckton:
> > > >
> > > >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Bren\
chley
> > > >
> > > >
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/viscount_monckton_denia\
list_dujour/
> > > >
> > > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to
support his bogus claims:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/22/105920/61
> > > >
> > > > Don't make major investments in snowshoes just yet;-)
> > > >
> > > > Roy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well the word is now out and creeping around the world because the
liberal
> > > > > controlled media is trying their very best to hide it. AGW was
entirely
> > > > > false and promoted to a world that was rapidly cooling off potentially
into
> > > > > a new ice age to take over the US and several European governments
before we
> > > > > drop into either a little or full ice age in the next dozen years. So
the
> > > > > entire AGW pogrom was nothing but a political ploy funded and directed
by
> > > > > David Rockefeller to seize political control of the western world as
his
> > > > > family has tried to do for well more than 100 years now.
> > > > > \
> > > > >
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-cr\
iminals-pjm-exclusive/
> > > > >
> > > > > JWE
> > > > > Long Beach, CA
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
> > > > > To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:14 PM
> > > > > Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: More government takeovers OT: golbal
wqarming
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Alternate, equally valid hypothesis:  "Solar cycle 24 got off to a
slow
> > > > > > start, has been going like gangbusters since 2010."  I actually have
no
> > > > > > idea what it's going to do in the next few years, it's not as
rigidly
> > > > > > periodic as it's usually presented.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=sunspot-act\
ivity-ramping-up-out-of-2009-07-06
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Roy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@>
wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Roy
> > > > > >> That chart is only accurate up until it hits the bottom and the
predicted
> > > > > >> future prediction was higher than the last cycle 5 years ago and as
the
> > > > > >> sun
> > > > > >> has remained in an extreme minimum they have gradually reduced the
> > > > > >> predicted
> > > > > >> line. The predicted sequence 5 years ago was a peak of 150 spots
per day
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> over the last 5 years they have gradually reduced that number to
about 60
> > > > > >> spots a day. As the sun is in the lowest activity level ever
recorded it
> > > > > >> will be very interesting to see if they ever get it down to the
current
> > > > > >> level of 1 to 2 spots a month which is well below that of the
Dalton or
> > > > > >> Maunder minimums which never got that low. The liberal democrats
need to
> > > > > >> keep the people frightened of burning to death in the near future
from
> > > > > >> global warming when the real truth is closer to millions freezing
to
> > > > > >> death
> > > > > >> in northern climates as we enter into a minimum of 50 to 60 years
of at
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> minimum a little ice age similar to that which we exited some 300
years
> > > > > >> ago
> > > > > >> and maybe a full ice age like we exited some 13,000 years ago.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The real problem is liberal minds are not able to comprehend just
how
> > > > > >> radically the climate of the planets can be varied by our very
variable
> > > > > >> sun.
> > > > > >> And this is why nations get into serious problems when they allow
liberal
> > > > > >> minds to have the decision authority in society or in education.
Liberal
> > > > > >> minds just do not have the capacity to deal with all the variables
that
> > > > > >> need
> > > > > >> to be dealt with in making these complex decisions and so they end
up
> > > > > >> improving their financial status while letting the society crash
> > > > > >> unprepared
> > > > > >> for problems conservative minds had seen coming for many years.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> JWE
> > > > > >> Long Beach, CA
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Roy, you're cherry picking your facts.

You've previously maintained that you only consider 30 year averages but here
you look at the VERY short term of one year.  But, when looking at the chart you
reference, it is clear that recently the temperature peaked and is now declining
- so it makes sense that this year's temperature would be near that recent peak.

Your site on Arctic ice ignores the fact that polar ice is actually increasing
when you consider both poles -  Antacrctic ice has been increasing fairly
steadily plus, Arctic ice seems to be recovering from the 2007 low point at a
fair clip.
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_4CE_PolarIceCaps.htm#arct

If maximum temperatures don't rise and minimum temperatures do rise then sure
enough, the average temperature rises.  There are two possible inter-related
causes.  The UHI (Urban Heat Island) effect causes temperatures recorded near or
in cities to display this effect - it is common knowledge that cities are warmer
than suburbs just based on watching your car thermometer while driving through a
city;  this has effect been recognized in peer reviewed papers.  This effect has
been emphasized (perhaps deliberately) in recent years by a dramatic reduction
in the number of ground based temperature stations, where the majority of this
reduction has been in high altitude stations located far from population
centers.

Of course, this can be corrected:
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif 
Surprisingly, as the percentage of UHI affected stations increases, the
"correction" becomes more positive - opposite of what one might expect.  And,
the "correction" is about the size of the change in temperature. Plus, the
corrections more or less stopped once satellite data became available to cross
check against.

The satellite temperatures are relatively recent so they cover a shorter period
but differ from the ground based measurements:
<
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/mean:1/offset/from:1980/plot/rss/from:1980/\
to:1990/trend/plot/rss/from:1990/to:2000/trend/plot/rss/from:2000/to:2010/trend/\
plot/hadsst2gl/from:1980/mean:1/scale:1 >

Then, there is the recent ClimateGate stuff that calls much of the ground based
measurements and their processing into question:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.shtml

One can select information to support most any view on AGW - the better idea is
to look at the underlying data and form your own opinion rather than assuming
that the data and talking points someone selects for you lead to an unbiased
conclusion.

John



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@...> wrote:
>
> It's not hardly one of the coldest years on record.
>
> http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html
>
> One of many things that's lost on the science deniers is that minimum
temperatures, as well as maximum temperatures are part of climate.  If maximums
don't particularly rise, but minimums do, the climate is actually getting
warmer.  One place it shows up is decreased Arctic ice.
>
> http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentslc.html
>
> Roy
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "dave_mucha" <dave_mucha@> wrote:
> >
> > how come is it that ranting about man caused global warming in the coldest
year in a decade, one of the coldest years on record, is called 'science' but
when someone points out that people are fudging numbers to pretend it is much
hotter than it really is, they are called bogus ?
> >
> > It that some altenate universe were scinece is an extension of politics and
follows the money ?
> >
> > I prefer the real universe where facts are the rule of the day.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to support
his bogus claims:
> > >
> >
>

My posting was seriously serious.  Lord Moncton is a man who, though his better
judgement should have told him not to, has chosen to make himself a public
figure.  Thus he is fair game.  He has that in common with other people I named
in that posting. The facts are as I've set them out.

If you are referring to my characterization of Ronald Reagan, that is factual
too, and he did, regretably, offer himself for public service, thus rendering
himself fair game.  He WAS a B-movie actor until public lack of perspicacity
elevated him to a position above his station and his competence.  And the Iron
Lady IS the daughter of a grocer in a small provincial town of no distinction.
And she did, regretably, offer herself for public service, thus rendering
herself fair game.

Thatcher may be fairly accused of suffering from acute false consciousness. 
There are certain impediments to levelling such an accusation  at Reagan.

Thatcher, in addition, suffered from the same reflex bellicosity that is so
dominant a trait in all too many Americans.

But worry not.  Those people are history.  All we have left to do is remedy
their legacy. We shall do so. The Permanent Revolution marches on :-).

And just so you know: I am perfectly aware what "ad hominem" means. The
prohibition you allude to is a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on other
group members.  NOT a prohibition against ad hominem attacks on public figures. 
In fact, IMO, is is you DUTY to flail mercilessly those who offer themselves for
public service.  Tho you must do so in language that would not get you evicted
from my Christmas Open House.

Sam



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "GadgetBuilder" <jjmoran@...> wrote:
>
> Sam,
>
> Is your post simply an illustration of a nasty "Ad Hominem" or are you
serious?
>
> http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
>
> If you can't argue the facts, attack the person...
>
> John
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@> wrote:
> >
> > We can safely dismiss Chris Moncton and cock a snoot at his title.  He is a
laughing stock everywhere being but a nasty piece of public school educated,
inky fingered scribe for a minor provincial newspaper, risen to fame, tho not to
real fortune, by riding into the Iron Lady's now discredited government on the
coat tails of his grandpappy's reputation.  Granpappy was the solicitor
(attorney) who advised Edward VIII when he couldn't keep his hands of Wallis
Simpson.  Grandpappy was made a viscount - the first of Benchley - for his
sterling services to the King who gave up his throne for the woman he loved and
who then had to spend the rest of his life, mit Frau, if not in Coventry which
would have been bad enuff, but - gasp - in FRANCE!!
> >
> > Chris' pappy was a charicature of that charicature we know as "Colonel
Blimp".  He shone in the retreat from France by being speedier than his fleeing
men and was therefore snatched off the beach at Dunkirk in a manner befitting a
gentleman - ahead of the lower orders.  He promptly wangled a posting to some
staff college Stateside and cowered there from 1940 until the fighting in North
Africa was well and truly over, so it was safe for him to accept a posting to
Palestine in '44. Thence he followed the Canadians up through Italy, safely
shielded by them, so he could join his own regiment (an armoured regiment, I
seem to recall, maybe the King's Own) in Germany AFTER she had been conquered
and laid waste.
> >
> > Chris hisself is as much an expert on climate as the grocer's daughter from
- where was it? - Grantham was on economics. Mind you, she did know as much as
that B-movie actor who nevertheless acted well enough to convince far too many
that he really WAS a POTUS.   Ah, well - we'll get through the consequences of
that fox's pass too.
> >
> > As for the Viscount of Benchley, he's right up there in the opportunism
department with the vicar of Bray!
> >
> > You may visit the vicar here:
> >
> > http://www.stthomasu.ca/~hunt/braytext.htm
> >
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> > >
> > > A bit of a misinterpretation of the text in the purloined e-mails.  Here's
a little background on Monckton:
> > >
> > >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Bren\
chley
> > >
> > >
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/viscount_monckton_denia\
list_dujour/
> > >
> > > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to support
his bogus claims:
> > >
> > > http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/22/105920/61
> > >
> > > Don't make major investments in snowshoes just yet;-)
> > >
> > > Roy
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well the word is now out and creeping around the world because the
liberal
> > > > controlled media is trying their very best to hide it. AGW was entirely
> > > > false and promoted to a world that was rapidly cooling off potentially
into
> > > > a new ice age to take over the US and several European governments
before we
> > > > drop into either a little or full ice age in the next dozen years. So
the
> > > > entire AGW pogrom was nothing but a political ploy funded and directed
by
> > > > David Rockefeller to seize political control of the western world as his
> > > > family has tried to do for well more than 100 years now.
> > > > \
> > > >
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-cr\
iminals-pjm-exclusive/
> > > >
> > > > JWE
> > > > Long Beach, CA
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
> > > > To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:14 PM
> > > > Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: More government takeovers OT: golbal
wqarming
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Alternate, equally valid hypothesis:  "Solar cycle 24 got off to a
slow
> > > > > start, has been going like gangbusters since 2010."  I actually have
no
> > > > > idea what it's going to do in the next few years, it's not as rigidly
> > > > > periodic as it's usually presented.
> > > > >
> > > > >
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=sunspot-act\
ivity-ramping-up-out-of-2009-07-06
> > > > >
> > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
> > > > >
> > > > > Roy
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@>
wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Roy
> > > > >> That chart is only accurate up until it hits the bottom and the
predicted
> > > > >> future prediction was higher than the last cycle 5 years ago and as
the
> > > > >> sun
> > > > >> has remained in an extreme minimum they have gradually reduced the
> > > > >> predicted
> > > > >> line. The predicted sequence 5 years ago was a peak of 150 spots per
day
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> over the last 5 years they have gradually reduced that number to
about 60
> > > > >> spots a day. As the sun is in the lowest activity level ever recorded
it
> > > > >> will be very interesting to see if they ever get it down to the
current
> > > > >> level of 1 to 2 spots a month which is well below that of the Dalton
or
> > > > >> Maunder minimums which never got that low. The liberal democrats need
to
> > > > >> keep the people frightened of burning to death in the near future
from
> > > > >> global warming when the real truth is closer to millions freezing to
> > > > >> death
> > > > >> in northern climates as we enter into a minimum of 50 to 60 years of
at
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> minimum a little ice age similar to that which we exited some 300
years
> > > > >> ago
> > > > >> and maybe a full ice age like we exited some 13,000 years ago.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The real problem is liberal minds are not able to comprehend just how
> > > > >> radically the climate of the planets can be varied by our very
variable
> > > > >> sun.
> > > > >> And this is why nations get into serious problems when they allow
liberal
> > > > >> minds to have the decision authority in society or in education.
Liberal
> > > > >> minds just do not have the capacity to deal with all the variables
that
> > > > >> need
> > > > >> to be dealt with in making these complex decisions and so they end up
> > > > >> improving their financial status while letting the society crash
> > > > >> unprepared
> > > > >> for problems conservative minds had seen coming for many years.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JWE
> > > > >> Long Beach, CA
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Sam,

Is your post simply an illustration of a nasty "Ad Hominem" or are you serious?

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

If you can't argue the facts, attack the person...

John



--- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "x" <lesleynward@...> wrote:
>
> We can safely dismiss Chris Moncton and cock a snoot at his title.  He is a
laughing stock everywhere being but a nasty piece of public school educated,
inky fingered scribe for a minor provincial newspaper, risen to fame, tho not to
real fortune, by riding into the Iron Lady's now discredited government on the
coat tails of his grandpappy's reputation.  Granpappy was the solicitor
(attorney) who advised Edward VIII when he couldn't keep his hands of Wallis
Simpson.  Grandpappy was made a viscount - the first of Benchley - for his
sterling services to the King who gave up his throne for the woman he loved and
who then had to spend the rest of his life, mit Frau, if not in Coventry which
would have been bad enuff, but - gasp - in FRANCE!!
>
> Chris' pappy was a charicature of that charicature we know as "Colonel Blimp".
He shone in the retreat from France by being speedier than his fleeing men and
was therefore snatched off the beach at Dunkirk in a manner befitting a
gentleman - ahead of the lower orders.  He promptly wangled a posting to some
staff college Stateside and cowered there from 1940 until the fighting in North
Africa was well and truly over, so it was safe for him to accept a posting to
Palestine in '44. Thence he followed the Canadians up through Italy, safely
shielded by them, so he could join his own regiment (an armoured regiment, I
seem to recall, maybe the King's Own) in Germany AFTER she had been conquered
and laid waste.
>
> Chris hisself is as much an expert on climate as the grocer's daughter from -
where was it? - Grantham was on economics. Mind you, she did know as much as
that B-movie actor who nevertheless acted well enough to convince far too many
that he really WAS a POTUS.   Ah, well - we'll get through the consequences of
that fox's pass too.
>
> As for the Viscount of Benchley, he's right up there in the opportunism
department with the vicar of Bray!
>
> You may visit the vicar here:
>
> http://www.stthomasu.ca/~hunt/braytext.htm
>
>
> Sam
>
>
>
>
> --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
> >
> > A bit of a misinterpretation of the text in the purloined e-mails.  Here's a
little background on Monckton:
> >
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Bren\
chley
> >
> >
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/viscount_monckton_denia\
list_dujour/
> >
> > Here are the actual facts behind one of the snippets he's using to support
his bogus claims:
> >
> > http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/22/105920/61
> >
> > Don't make major investments in snowshoes just yet;-)
> >
> > Roy
> >
> >
> > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Well the word is now out and creeping around the world because the liberal
> > > controlled media is trying their very best to hide it. AGW was entirely
> > > false and promoted to a world that was rapidly cooling off potentially
into
> > > a new ice age to take over the US and several European governments before
we
> > > drop into either a little or full ice age in the next dozen years. So the
> > > entire AGW pogrom was nothing but a political ploy funded and directed by
> > > David Rockefeller to seize political control of the western world as his
> > > family has tried to do for well more than 100 years now.
> > > \
> > >
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/viscount-monckton-on-global-warminggate-they-are-cr\
iminals-pjm-exclusive/
> > >
> > > JWE
> > > Long Beach, CA
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "roylowenthal" <roylowenthal@>
> > > To: <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 7:14 PM
> > > Subject: [7x10minilathe] Re: More government takeovers OT: golbal wqarming
> > >
> > >
> > > > Alternate, equally valid hypothesis:  "Solar cycle 24 got off to a slow
> > > > start, has been going like gangbusters since 2010."  I actually have no
> > > > idea what it's going to do in the next few years, it's not as rigidly
> > > > periodic as it's usually presented.
> > > >
> > > >
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=sunspot-act\
ivity-ramping-up-out-of-2009-07-06
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cycles
> > > >
> > > > Roy
> > > >
> > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "James Early" <j.w.early@> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Roy
> > > >> That chart is only accurate up until it hits the bottom and the
predicted
> > > >> future prediction was higher than the last cycle 5 years ago and as the
> > > >> sun
> > > >> has remained in an extreme minimum they have gradually reduced the
> > > >> predicted
> > > >> line. The predicted sequence 5 years ago was a peak of 150 spots per
day
> > > >> and
> > > >> over the last 5 years they have gradually reduced that number to about
60
> > > >> spots a day. As the sun is in the lowest activity level ever recorded
it
> > > >> will be very interesting to see if they ever get it down to the current
> > > >> level of 1 to 2 spots a month which is well below that of the Dalton or
> > > >> Maunder minimums which never got that low. The liberal democrats need
to
> > > >> keep the people frightened of burning to death in the near future from
> > > >> global warming when the real truth is closer to millions freezing to
> > > >> death
> > > >> in northern climates as we enter into a minimum of 50 to 60 years of at
> > > >> the
> > > >> minimum a little ice age similar to that which we exited some 300 years
> > > >> ago
> > > >> and maybe a full ice age like we exited some 13,000 years ago.
> > > >>
> > > >> The real problem is liberal minds are not able to comprehend just how
> > > >> radically the climate of the planets can be varied by our very variable
> > > >> sun.
> > > >> And this is why nations get into serious problems when they allow
liberal
> > > >> minds to have the decision authority in society or in education.
Liberal
> > > >> minds just do not have the capacity to deal with all the variables that
> > > >> need
> > > >> to be dealt with in making these complex decisions and so they end up
> > > >> improving their financial status while letting the society crash
> > > >> unprepared
> > > >> for problems conservative minds had seen coming for many years.
> > > >>
> > > >> JWE
> > > >> Long Beach, CA
> > >
> >
>