THIS THREAD IS BOOKMARKED!

Actually, I think Weatherons were featured in a Star Trek episode once.

As far as humans CO2 output contributing to global warming, consider how much you'd huff & puff to push even a tiny (Cooper Mini) car for 1 measly kilometer. Also consider that a man on a bicycle is the most efficient self-propelled mechanism ever discovered. Not taking into account that the man & bicycle is a very small fraction of the mass of the Cooper. And "energy efficient" automobiles get %20 efficiency as far as converting the energy of gasoline into motion. I don't know the efficiency of a man converting calories to mechanical energy.

The rampant life that grew when the oceans covered much more land than now? So there was "global warming" then (although the then-current life forms adapted, or maybe the darwin selection thing)

The IPCC has 1,600 scientists that signed the document and some of them deny that their research actually supports the IPCC conclusions. I will have to hunt down the link but there is another document of about 17,000 scientists that say man made global warming does not exist or is way over hyped. So basically more scientist do not believe in it. The climatologist who created the weather channel said that global warming is probably the greatest hoax ever to be played upon the world. So I am in good company.

So Thomas what do you think about the higher temps in the past with the assumption you dont think the chart makers are lying. Everyone can agree on the graph you provided, I just assert that it does not go back far enough in time. I only asked you one question and you failed to answer it so it looks like you are not living up to your own standards.

The claims of global cooling are not contradicted? It shur looks like they have been. All of this is just part of a bigger cycle that your time line does not show. You need to go back just a little farther in time.

The polar ice caps on Mars happened to retreat at the same time they did on earth. How many SUVs are on mars? Is it the Co2 or the Sun?

With your definition of bias anyone with an opinion on anything is now biased.

As for spending money we could go off into a million different directions but intelligent choices need to be made on which should be mitigated with limited resources. While people like you would spend billions on fighting GW I would use our resources on proven dangers with reasonable chances of success. Another one of these would be the ability to nudge an asteroid from hitting the earth. This would be far more worthy of our tax dollars. Every dollar spent on a goose chase is a dollar less to use on the real dangers that face us.

I just heard on the Discovery channel that after the first hour of swimming your body breaths 30,000 gallons of air a minute which is a hell of a lot more than normal.

I think in complete seriousness we should outlaw this CO₂ producing activity. To think of how selfish those people are being... just makes me sick you know?

Right, we have to stop all these monstrosities. Swimmers and automobile drivers should be banned from performing these acts in public.

To be honest, most of what I would otherwise have said has been well-covered by others already, so I'll just focus on this bit:

Neil Black has dealt with whether or not your previous posts actually agree with the graphs I provided, I take issue with "I only asked you one question and you failed to answer it".

The post which I believe you are suggesting contains a question begins with "Grab your pop corn." and ends with "... will definitely reduce the living style for you and your children. "

That post does not contain a single question mark outside of the areas quoted from my earlier post. I've noticed that you don't always use "correct" punctuation, so it's probably worth looking further at the contents.

The first part of the post (from the begining down to "...Guess what YOU are back in style my friend") contains your answers to five questions I'd posed. None of your answers pose any questions. There's then a personal attack, an allegation that the IPCC have orchestrated a cover-up of evidence and another personal attack (taking us to "You are young I assume so you do not have as much lived history to draw from so your mistakes are understandable").

There is then a request to defend myself. I did this with my original follow-up post. You instruct me to "find a temperature graph that does not make my point" and in my original follow-up I explained that I'd already done that. Then you gave us insight into how you think people formulate questions when taking part in discussions.

Finally you closed on an assertion that money should only be spent if it makes sense to spend it.

At no point did you ask me "one question". I would be interested to hear which part of the post you think constitutes asking me "one question" and exactly what you think the question was.

I also feel reassured that the worst thing you can think of to say about "my standards" is that I may not be living up to them. If that is true then I'm proud — I consider it admirable to attempt to better oneself.

My aunt's sister's dogs's friend just told me there's another 18,000 scientists who say the earth is flat! OH NO!

I can say nothing that is better than what you said, jhuuskon.

Like I said before you are not living up to your own standards Thomas. If you feel my comments rise to the level of personal attacks I think you have a very low threshold for declaring that. You seem to have made several nice little so called personal attacks of your own. Let me share some of your ignorance or forgetfulless on the subject.

"You are also apparently completely incapable of understanding the issues, beyond pulling some key words out of newspaper headlines and forming your own pseudo-scientific beliefs."

"I appreciate that's quite a few questions in a row, so I anticipate you will ignore most of them or try to brush the group of them away without further comment.
"

"Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll start doing his opinionated and logic bereft rants to them instead of us?"

"Do you think there's a way we could get some sort of hotline fitted to his house, so we can just get him to come and deal with it every time Frank Griffin posts one of these idiotic posts of his?"

"One of the many reasons that I think nobody is engaging you in conversation is that you spend half your posts playing to an audience that you imagine is the primary reason for the existence of bulletin boards like this.

As you seem to be with your evidence, I notice that you are ignoring any parts of any posts that don't fit with what you want to say."

"That's what conversations are really about, by the way — trying to persuade people. Not trying to win points, no matter how many people you are able to drag into your mire."

"We're saying the earth rotates around the sun, you're saying that it's flat and illuminated at God's discretion."

"And your bias stopped you from giving due attention to any articles that disagreed with your point of view."

"I dare expect you'll be back next week with a post titled "When will people accept that you can square a circle?"

Let me also remind you that use started off posting on this thread with insults without even contributing to the discussion in any way. I hope I gave enough examples of your behavior to sufficiently make my point to you on this matter?

You are also a picky little bugger. You are right I didnt ntnotsk a question it was a suggestion that you try to intelligently answer my assertion that your time lines do not go back far enough to see the VERY visible pattern of heating and cooling from the past. This would go a long way to help you understand that this is just a cycle that has been repeated over and over throughout history.

I will put it in question form since you have trouble functioning without explicit commands.

Do you see a pattern of warming and cooling going back the last 100,000 years?

Does the warming during peak tetemperatureseach levels equivalent to todays warming?

Since I personally see nothing special about our current warming tend from looking at past temperatures what makes this warming period so special? The spikes and troughs look the same during each heating and cooling cycle.

I appreciate that's quite a few questions in a row, so I anticipate you will ignore most of them or try to brush the group of them away without further comment.

Ok now on to other biz. The poster meaning for bias implied that the opinion was based on nothing. Opinion based in fact is a good thing. Thats how good decisions are made. Opinion based on feeling is called liberalism.

Just to inform some people on what the drudge report is and is not. The Drudge report is a collection of news that has been reported else where. It rarely creates its own news. Think of it as a collection point of the days most interesting new reports.

This seems like an opinion based on feeling, which makes you a liberal.
And I have just expressed an opinion that is based on a feeling that your opinion is based on a feeling, which I guess makes me a liberal as well.
Damn. Contagious.

Neil Black your quoting and commenting on every line of a post is a bit much. The post was mainly directed for Thomas I do not want you to do his homework for him especially since you seem to be misinformed on most counts. Neil you miss the beauty of my comments towards Thomas. The very first post he made was an attack and he has posted way more comments that could be considered attacks. Then he gets upset after interpreting something as a slight to him and he declares a problem with personal attacks. Doesnt this stike you as funny, kinda reminds me oh HRC. His mindless comment about me ignoring questions if foolish since look I am even responding to your posts about me that were not even directed at you hehe. I try to answer most questions or comments. I reused some of the same verbage he sent my way since he does not live up to his own standards. "Sorry, you don't get to arbitrarily end the argument" jeez you are just looking for trouble. I spent the whole top portion of the post trying to get Thomas up to speed and I was just turning my attention to other posts. I do not expect to convince people like you or thomas. I may sway a few people that are more open minded and less confrontational about their beliefs. That does not mean that you are even wrong since people interpret data differently. I also figured someone like you would latch upon the quotes and have to comment on them and look you are the lucky winner to get there first congrats. The play by play on almost every single sentence is truly "getting kind of tiresome" as you would put it.

Now on to more important Biz.

BTW Niel global warming stopped 10 years ago. Global cooling began 3 years ago.
Time to jump on board the new band wagon before the grant money runs out.

Here is that link I told you guys about. There is a petition containing 19,000 signatures now from scientists that disagree with the Global warming Hoax. They are urging the USA to avoid costly co2 caps and argue that a modest increase in temperature is actually good for the planet.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p1845.htm

I may have typed it wrong but there are 1,600 who signed the IPCC document not 16,000. There are far more scientists that disagree with global warming than agree with it. The true believers in global warming are just more vocal. This is the off topic area if I remember correctly. You are correct that this is a scientific issue BUT the main push behind action on this are political people like Al Gore who is no more qualified than all of us to make this decision so I see nothing wrong with us talking about it. Enough facts are sitting right in front of us. The main problems is how they are being interpeted. Misguided spending will have consequences even on all of us programmers so it is relevant. There will never be a aha moment about this because the issue is just going to slowly disapear without any fan fare just like 99% of all the mass media scares do.