Global Warming The debbil made me do it

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587 @attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?


'Big oily *******' and 'Regularly all lymphnodes park here'.

How's life? I was glad to see upon my return that you seem to
have a bit more time these days to devote to keeping the lazy
and the stupid in their place.

--

"I never thought there were corners in time
until I was told to go stand in one"
.....Grace Slick

On Mar 9, 1:48 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do with
climate
science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is real, isn't
it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

You haven't got any climate researchers. If you did, you could post links to
their peer-reviewed research.

You got suckered by a bogus petition. Because you wanted to

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You don't even know what it means.

Don't strain your back.

You know, your kind has been around a while. In the 80's it was the
anti-nuke crowd. Same look, same methods, same chicken little tactics,
same "concerned scientists," same power grab, same celebrity hand-
wringing ("I Hope the Russians Love their children too.."), same name-
calling, same phony-baloney cooked up numbers.

So I'll be very clear, and quote no one to substantiate my claims
because:

1) no matter which "peer reviewed research" is provided you will
dismiss it
2) you can do your own leg work, but clearly you don't care to

So here you go, one last time: Global Warming due to Man Made Causes
which will result in a 20 foot rise in Ocean levels is a Crock Of
Unmitigated ****.

I'll stick around that long and be sure to point it out to you.

Dan

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:28:12 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:


I kinda dried up my corner for a while, but there's kooks-a-plenty all
the sudden.

Always plenty to go around in the "twin towers were brought down by
remote controlled 767s and controlled demolition" threads in
alt.conspiracy.

Dan wrote in
:

On Mar 9, 12:56 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote
innews:bd53a4da-10c7-445f-a2ac-bf7ce8b1dabc@
13g2000hsb.googlegroups.co
m:



On Mar 9, 12:25 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming
scenario.

Really? Name two.

Can't speak for Iowa, but perhaps wading through 19,000
signatures will dampen your anti-denier zeal?

http://www.oism.org/pproject/index.htm

HAW-HAW-HAW!

At last--The Oregon Petition!

I *knew* one of you dupes would drag that in here. Gotcha!

The OP is a fraud. Deniers cite it to claim there are19,000 (or
17,000 or 21,000) scientists who doubt that AGW is real. There
aren't, but guys like you will believe it without checking because
you desperately want to. Just like you believe the "they were
predicting global cooling in 1970" lie, the "CO2 is a tiny part of
the atmosphere so it can't cause warming" lie and a dozen others.

You should be noticing by now that the sources you get this stuff
from are bull****ting you. How many lemon used cars do you have
to buy before you realize the dealer is screwing you? A bunch,
apparently, since you bought the Oregon Petition, too.

Skeptics have already waded through the OP: "Scientific American
took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a
Ph.D. in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to
identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the
petition -- one was an active climate researcher, two others had
relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal
evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three
did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not
answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition
supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers - a
respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the
climatological community"

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

So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do
with climate science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were
climate researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is
real, isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You're going to be shoveling a lot more of it due to global warming.

Bertie


Fine by me.

I'll just move to Iowa where's it gonna be paradise pretty soon!

Why, is Jay moving?


Seriously, you seem to fail to undersnd what this is all about. it's not
about a slightly balmier climate. It's about a good deal more energy
being involved in the wx. Whatever else may happen, that is certain.


Bertie

Dan wrote in
:

On Mar 9, 1:48 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do
with climate
science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate
researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is
real, isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

You haven't got any climate researchers. If you did, you could post
links to their peer-reviewed research.

You got suckered by a bogus petition. Because you wanted to

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You don't even know what it means.

Don't strain your back.

You know, your kind has been around a while. In the 80's it was the
anti-nuke crowd. Same look, same methods, same chicken little tactics,
same "concerned scientists," same power grab, same celebrity hand-
wringing ("I Hope the Russians Love their children too.."), same name-
calling, same phony-baloney cooked up numbers.


So, you're saying a nuclear conflict would have been no big deal?

And "your kind?"


Good grief.



Bertie

mariposas rand mair fheal wrote in news:mair_fheal-
:

In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I kinda dried up my corner for a while, but there's kooks-a-plenty all
the sudden.

election year


True.

Bertie

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

Cow Tse Tung wrote in
:

In article , Bertie
the Bunyip says...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:UjRAj.68145$yE1.52587 @attbi_s21:

In every model I've seen, Iowa comes out a big winner in any
global warming scenario.

Really? Name two.

Bob and Ralph.

Evasion noted.

Maybe they're acronyms?


'Big oily *******' and 'Regularly all lymphnodes park here'.

How's life? I was glad to see upon my return that you seem to
have a bit more time these days to devote to keeping the lazy
and the stupid in their place.


You know, ups and downs. I get more time than I used to cuz company now
pay for BB in hotel rooms... There also seems to be a sudden glut of the
lazy and stupid these days.

I got lured out of retirement last summer by an old friend who
needed help with his IT shop. I've finally gotten things to
where I have some time to play again.

I don't know if its the relative anonymity or what, but teh
usernetz has always seemed to hold a fascination for the
mentally challenged. A 'target-rich' environment.

--

"I never thought there were corners in time
until I was told to go stand in one"
.....Grace Slick

Just go look it up! wrote in
:

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:28:12 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:


I kinda dried up my corner for a while, but there's kooks-a-plenty all
the sudden.

Always plenty to go around in the "twin towers were brought down by
remote controlled 767s and controlled demolition" threads in
alt.conspiracy.


Oh god, not those guys. I fly a 757 for a living and it's mindnumbingly
frustrating to try and explain even the simplest detail of flying to
those ****s. I dont find them very entertaining as kooks either. The
endless shrieks of 'shill, shill' just aren't all that much fun.
netkkkops are a lot more fun.


Bertie

On Mar 9, 2:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote :



On Mar 9, 1:48 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
So, only 1,400 signatories even *claimed* to have anything to do
with climate
science. And out of that 1,400, two hundred were climate
researchers.

That's a long way from 19,000 scientists who doubt that AGW is
real, isn't it?

You won't listen to "climate researchers" unless they abide by your
hysteria.

You haven't got any climate researchers. If you did, you could post
links to their peer-reviewed research.

You got suckered by a bogus petition. Because you wanted to

I gotta go shovel the snow caused by all this global warming.

You don't even know what it means.

Don't strain your back.

You know, your kind has been around a while. In the 80's it was the
anti-nuke crowd. Same look, same methods, same chicken little tactics,
same "concerned scientists," same power grab, same celebrity hand-
wringing ("I Hope the Russians Love their children too.."), same name-
calling, same phony-baloney cooked up numbers.

So, you're saying a nuclear conflict would have been no big deal?

And "your kind?"

Good grief.

Bertie

We all knew the conflict would be catastrophic.

However, the Anti-nuke crowd wanted the US to disarm unilaterally.
They also insisted that it was US technical advances and weapon
fielding that was destabilizing.

It was.

To the Soviet Empire.

And yeah, his "kind." The insulting, name calling, rude, and obnoxious
"kind."

Dan

On Mar 9, 2:16 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I'll just move to Iowa where's it gonna be paradise pretty soon!

Why, is Jay moving?

Seriously, you seem to fail to undersnd what this is all about. it's not
about a slightly balmier climate. It's about a good deal more energy
being involved in the wx. Whatever else may happen, that is certain.

Bertie

You're right that I am failing.

I am failing to agree with those who insist that the oceans will rise
20 feet, the 0.6 Degree rise we see is solely due to man made causes,
and that the earth is unable to regulate the temperature through
natural processes.

I'm also failing to agree that when the Climate change apostles
preach, "All the world's scientists agree," but when anyone dares
offer contrary opinion, they are pilloried as "not climate
scientists."

You fly in weather -- when the hell did a "scientist" ever get it
right 50% of the time?

In fact, that's another laughable trait of this latest "crisis" -- it
is the first time in science history that "all scientist agree."

Dan