You don't have to respond to this in the list, but wouldn't supporting new industry increase corporate profit as opposed to independent research that are usually non-profit and tend to come from university professors such as chomsky? Its the game we live in.

Ron
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: "DanC" <clore@...>
Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 05:31:17
To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [smygo] Re: Drought Around World

--- In smygo@yahoogroups.com, tehanarchy@... wrote:
>
> Would the argument as well be that after the renaissance the production was to high? Why have world independent scientists so worked up to debunk this? Is anarcho thinking becoming structural? Isn't that counter-productive to start taking facts from corporately funded "scientists"?

Even if Smygo were an appropriate place to debate this topic, I doubt that I could come up with a good response to this Bizarro World excuse for an argument. (Uh, "independent" scientists are worked up to debunk climate change, and corporately-funded scientists support it?!?)




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'd be interested to read these publications.

Ron
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Tuckerman <deanosor@...>
Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:39:04
To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Cc: <tehanarchy@...>
Subject: Re: [smygo] Drought Around World

Not if the facts are right. I know non corporate funded anarchist
scientists who agree with these "corporate funded" scientists.

On 2/4/11 8:03 PM, tehanarchy@... wrote:
> Would the argument as well be that after the renaissance the production was to high? Why have world independent scientists so worked up to debunk this? Is anarcho thinking becoming structural? Isn't that counter-productive to start taking facts from corporately funded "scientists"?
>
> Ron
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Clore<clore@...>
> Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 19:57:32
> To:<smygo@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [smygo] Drought Around World
>
> tehanarchy@... wrote:
>
>
>> Has anyone noticed the amount of snow and temperature drop in the US
>> as a whole in years? Solar flares at its lowest in 500 years, sounds
>> a lot like after the renaissance period doesn't it? When is the
>> global warming officially supposed to happen because UK and US seem
>> to be "immune" to this "warming" as a result of these solar flares.
>> Sounds more to me as "global cooling" just as 500 years ago. I don't
>> mean to alarm the alarmist.
>>
> This regressive-rightist talking point reveals a striking ignorance of
> the science involved. Anthropogenic climate change involves higher
> average over-all temperatures (hence the term "global warming"), but
> also more extreme weather of all kinds. Hence, even though the US and UK
> have had record-high annual temperatures the last few years, they have
> also seen colder and more extreme weather in the winter. This doesn't
> contradict or falsify anthropogenic climate change -- it helps confirm it.
>
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Anybody want to start in on 9/11? I just love those truthers...

--- In smygo@yahoogroups.com, tehanarchy@... wrote:
>
> I'd be interested to read these publications.
>
> Ron
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Tuckerman <deanosor@...>
> Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:39:04
> To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: <tehanarchy@...>
> Subject: Re: [smygo] Drought Around World
>
> Not if the facts are right. I know non corporate funded anarchist
> scientists who agree with these "corporate funded" scientists.
>
>
> On 2/4/11 8:03 PM, tehanarchy@... wrote:
> > Would the argument as well be that after the renaissance the production was to high? Why have world independent scientists so worked up to debunk this? Is anarcho thinking becoming structural? Isn't that counter-productive to start taking facts from corporately funded "scientists"?
> >
> > Ron
> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Clore<clore@...>
> > Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 19:57:32
> > To:<smygo@yahoogroups.com>
> > Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [smygo] Drought Around World
> >
> > tehanarchy@... wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Has anyone noticed the amount of snow and temperature drop in the US
> >> as a whole in years? Solar flares at its lowest in 500 years, sounds
> >> a lot like after the renaissance period doesn't it? When is the
> >> global warming officially supposed to happen because UK and US seem
> >> to be "immune" to this "warming" as a result of these solar flares.
> >> Sounds more to me as "global cooling" just as 500 years ago. I don't
> >> mean to alarm the alarmist.
> >>
> > This regressive-rightist talking point reveals a striking ignorance of
> > the science involved. Anthropogenic climate change involves higher
> > average over-all temperatures (hence the term "global warming"), but
> > also more extreme weather of all kinds. Hence, even though the US and UK
> > have had record-high annual temperatures the last few years, they have
> > also seen colder and more extreme weather in the winter. This doesn't
> > contradict or falsify anthropogenic climate change -- it helps confirm it.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

How does Ron square the fact that corporations are spending millions of
dollars in fighting any effort to combat climate change, while at the same
time funding all of these so-called "corporate" scientists.

Sounds like somebody's head just exploded.

Let's explain this in simple terms:

Weather = A thunderstorm. A specific blizzard in a specific place.
Climate = Long term meteorological conditions over he course of seasons and
years

In fact, winters in North America are on average warmer. The blizzards we
are having are more intense and are dropping more precipitation. This is
within the predictions of global warming, which means there is more moisture
in the atmosphere. The more moisture in the air, the more intense these
storms are.

Chuck

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:38 PM, <tehanarchy@...> wrote:

>
>
> You don't have to respond to this in the list, but wouldn't supporting new
> industry increase corporate profit as opposed to independent research that
> are usually non-profit and tend to come from university professors such as
> chomsky? Its the game we live in.
>
>
> Ron
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "DanC" <clore@...>
> Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 05:31:17
> To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [smygo] Re: Drought Around World
>
> --- In smygo@yahoogroups.com, tehanarchy@... wrote:
> >
> > Would the argument as well be that after the renaissance the production
> was to high? Why have world independent scientists so worked up to debunk
> this? Is anarcho thinking becoming structural? Isn't that counter-productive
> to start taking facts from corporately funded "scientists"?
>
> Even if Smygo were an appropriate place to debate this topic, I doubt that
> I could come up with a good response to this Bizarro World excuse for an
> argument. (Uh, "independent" scientists are worked up to debunk climate
> change, and corporately-funded scientists support it?!?)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Chuck Munson

Bread and Roses Web Design
http://www.breadandrosesweb.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Its pretty simple economics. If people are craving a new means of production of energy because of the "big fear", bp, exxon/mobile and shell will have no problem dragging the "good willers" along at a slow pace to appease the public and hold tight to both industries. Is this not obvious? Hire the scientists, make the slowest moving industry which the technology has been here for decades, ride the public, and hold both industries. Its a win-win for them. Ideally, it needs to be done for eco reasons, but its been hijacked and accepted as that because everyone has a clearer conscience because their new escalade hybrid only burns 15mpg instead of 10.

RON


Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Munson <chuck0munson@...>
Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 22:50:42
To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [smygo] Re: Drought Around World

How does Ron square the fact that corporations are spending millions of
dollars in fighting any effort to combat climate change, while at the same
time funding all of these so-called "corporate" scientists.

Sounds like somebody's head just exploded.

Let's explain this in simple terms:

Weather = A thunderstorm. A specific blizzard in a specific place.
Climate = Long term meteorological conditions over he course of seasons and
years

In fact, winters in North America are on average warmer. The blizzards we
are having are more intense and are dropping more precipitation. This is
within the predictions of global warming, which means there is more moisture
in the atmosphere. The more moisture in the air, the more intense these
storms are.

Chuck

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:38 PM, <tehanarchy@...> wrote:

>
>
> You don't have to respond to this in the list, but wouldn't supporting new
> industry increase corporate profit as opposed to independent research that
> are usually non-profit and tend to come from university professors such as
> chomsky? Its the game we live in.
>
>
> Ron
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "DanC" <clore@...>
> Sender: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 05:31:17
> To: <smygo@yahoogroups.com>
> Reply-To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [smygo] Re: Drought Around World
>
> --- In smygo@yahoogroups.com, tehanarchy@... wrote:
> >
> > Would the argument as well be that after the renaissance the production
> was to high? Why have world independent scientists so worked up to debunk
> this? Is anarcho thinking becoming structural? Isn't that counter-productive
> to start taking facts from corporately funded "scientists"?
>
> Even if Smygo were an appropriate place to debate this topic, I doubt that
> I could come up with a good response to this Bizarro World excuse for an
> argument. (Uh, "independent" scientists are worked up to debunk climate
> change, and corporately-funded scientists support it?!?)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Chuck Munson

Bread and Roses Web Design
http://www.breadandrosesweb.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]