Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: OT: Myth against science.

Expand Messages
  • Roy
    That s a verbose way of saying, the facts don t support my beliefs, so I m going home! Roy
    Message 1 of 352 , May 13, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      That's a verbose way of saying, "the facts don't support my beliefs, so I'm going home!"

      Roy



      --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "bigmanfun" <bigmanfun@...> wrote:
      >
      > Roy,
      > I don't actually intend to argue this topic. The science takes volumes to address even a small portion of it. Your wish to cherry pick a couple sentences as representing the topic disappoints me. You are a smart person. I have always respected your discussions, but on this one, you just aren't pursuing the depth of science necessary to get to understanding.
      >
      > The main stream scientific community doesn't write about this topic, nor will I. There are so many worthwhile things to do and this isn't one that pays. You have to compromise your reputation to publish in it. Like I said, follow the money.
      >
      > Thomas
      >
      > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "Roy" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Your arguments would be better served by dealing with whole sentences, not cherry picked phrases.
      > >
      > > As I've stated, I disagree with your opinion about wikipedia. Checking other sources for info about their articles on climate shows that they're pretty representative of the main stream scientific community. Like I said, if you've got better info, submit corrections. If you can't get them accepted, it's time to re-evaluate your sources.
      > >
      > > Don't conflate "weather" with "climate"; short term weather forecasts are significantly different than long term trends. Realistically, it's just about impossible to honestly say that climate change has caused any particular weather event or a whole year's worth of them. Weather predictions look at localized, short term stuff, climate discussions look at long term trends.
      > >
      > > FWIW, I've gotten fond of weather underground for local forecasts & data:
      > >
      > > http://www.wunderground.com/
      > >
      > > They have volunteer stations in a lot more places than NOAA has official stations. It's fun to compare rainfall amounts between 2 different stations that are roughly equidistant from me with what my rain gauge shows! Unlike a lot of TV weather readers, they understand climate:
      > >
      > > http://www.wunderground.com/climate/facts.asp
      > >
      > > Roy
      > >
      > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "bigmanfun" <bigmanfun@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Roy,
      > > > > Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas <- You got this correct.
      > > > > As temps rise, water vapor rises <- Not necessarily. See combined gas law. It depends on the conditions.
      > > >
      > > > Everything else in your post was misleading. Wiki is a terrible reference for this subject. I have warned you of this before. It only addresses a small portion of the science behind the issue. Read the discussion pages on topics for opposing view points.
      > > >
      > > > I use the AF Weather models for my work. Sometime the Stennis models from the Navy or NASA. NOAA? Only when forced. They are politically driven so sometimes they work and sometimes they don't, depending upon their purpose. After all, do they predict the weather accurately?
      > > >
      > > > GW exists. AGW-there is no proof. When you think someone has the proof, follow the money. Especially when taxes are involved.
      > > >
      > > > Thomas
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, "Roy" <roylowenthal@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas, but, the amount present is determined mostly by temperature. In other words, it's not an independent variable. That's one of the things that makes the whole issue so easily distorted by charlatans.
      > > > >
      > > > > Wikipedia is capable of being user edited, although they've been spoofed enough times that the process is less open than it used to be. Still, if you're convinced they're in error, feel free to correct them. Be prepared with unimpeachable sources, not specious statistical manipulation of well publicized data.
      > > > >
      > > > > The reality is >95% of actual climatologists agree that CO2 is the major contributor to AGW. As temps rise, water vapor rises - what keeps temps from running away is the formation of clouds, which tend to lower the temp.
      > > > >
      > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
      > > > >
      > > > > Roy
      > > > >
      > >
      >
    • James
      Well Paul - where s the chopping block? Looks like you were wrong huh!
      Message 352 of 352 , Jan 27, 2014
      • 0 Attachment
        Well Paul - where's the chopping block? Looks like you were wrong huh!


        --- In 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com, Paul King <pking8075@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hey Guys, well Ted anyway, Looks like obama is going to put his voters heads on the chopping block next week.
        >
        >
        >     I now know why that 6?6 gave back $20,000 of his salary. He's going to get it back next week when he cuts S.S.and Medicare Benefits, and makes the blue collar workerspay more taxes.
        >
        >     I wish it only effected the ones that voted for him!  But Nooooooo its going to effectall Mid-Class & Low Income people. Well i hope this opens up his voters eyes. I'd say he'll get his $20,000 back behind closed doors and a lot more from his Big Wig Backers.
        >
        >     Talk about a wolf in sheep's clothing WHOOOOOOOOOOOW.
        >
        >     Hes not worried about North Korea moving their Missilesas close as they can so then can also Hit Japan.
        >
        >     When the fireworks start, I guess he'll be playing golf with Tiger and his gal Lynsey.
        >
        >     Yeah it was more important to find somewhere to be instead of meeting the New Pope!
        >
        >     Wait it just came across the news that the unemployment was down 7.6% but only 88,000
        > jobs were created. Quote from News " This is like a StinkyDog Full of Fleas ". Sounds about right to me!   
        >
        >
        > " FREEDOM of SPEECH or BLACK SEDANS "
        >
        >
        >
        > Paul
        >
        >     
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >    
        >
        >   
        >
        >    
        >    
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > : Ted Miller <millertheo4of9@...>
        >
        > To: "7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com" <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 9:30 AM
        > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] Re: OT: Firearms OT: N. Korea
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > It bothers me,  Heads of North Korea and the USA are nuts.
        > From: Paul King <pking8075@...>
        > To: "7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com" <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:25 AM
        > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] Re: OT: Firearms OT: N. Korea
        >
        >  
        > What do u all think about N. Korea?
        >
        > Paul 
        >
        >
        >
        > From: Ted Miller <millertheo4of9@...>
        > To: "7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com" <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 7:37 AM
        > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] Re: OT: Firearms
        >
        > I think that is great.
        >  
        > Ted
        >
        > From: warren hughes <ofujunkcy@...>
        > To: "7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com" <7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 1:08 AM
        > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] Re: OT: Firearms
        >
        >  
        > Well while your all arguing I am busy building. Got a dandy old Krag rifle working on now. Just finished a Mauser in 2506. The more I build the better I feel. Warren
        >
        > From: Thomas Knight <taknight@...>
        > To: 7x10minilathe@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:51 AM
        > Subject: Re: [7x10minilathe] Re: OT: Firearms
        >
        >  
        > I have, and my comments stand.  They are thinly veiled, unacademic, crap.
        > On Apr 2, 2013 8:44 PM, "Roy" <roylowenthal@...> wrote:
        >
        > > 
        > >Follow the links in the article; they describe exactly how your objections were anticipated & avoided. Roy --- In mailto:7x10minilathe%40yahoogroups.com, Thomas Knight <taknight@> wrote: > > Same old crap. "Controls for age, race, and gender" does not account for > increased risk from occupation etc that may have led a person to carry in > the first place. They didn't want to see anything that counters their > opinion so they stacked the deck. Lets remember that Lott came into this > trying to show proof that guns were a problem and his research led him the > other way. > On Mar 29, 2013 7:45 PM, "Roy" <roylowenthal@> wrote: > > > ** > > > > > > Interesting article about firearms for personal safety: > > > > > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2013/mar/25/guns-protection-national-rifle-association > > > > Roy > > > > > > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.