Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #449199 > unrolled thread
| Started by | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-04-26 11:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-04-27 18:29 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 145 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Possibly good? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-04-26 11:49 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 12:28 -0700
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-26 22:24 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-26 15:38 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 21:47 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 15:51 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-27 00:39 -0700
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-26 23:32 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-27 03:45 -0700
Re: Possibly good? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-27 11:03 -0500
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-27 22:03 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-27 17:28 -0700
Re: Possibly good? a.m <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 11:01 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 08:52 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 16:01 +0000
Re: Possibly good? a.m <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 12:43 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 09:56 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 09:48 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 19:08 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 13:00 -0700
Re: Possibly good? a.m <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 16:23 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 13:36 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 20:59 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 14:11 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 22:33 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 15:35 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 22:56 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 16:06 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 23:21 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 16:42 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 14:27 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 10:26 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-29 19:27 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 16:54 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 19:41 -0400
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 20:56 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 14:07 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 22:06 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 15:30 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 22:43 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 16:07 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 23:17 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 16:42 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 00:58 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 18:22 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 01:37 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 18:44 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 01:53 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 19:06 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 02:16 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 19:30 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 02:44 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 19:46 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 02:54 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 20:00 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-04-29 03:03 +0000
Our planet is greener now, vs. 100 years ago. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-29 04:44 -0700
Re: Our planet is greener now, vs. 100 years ago. Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-29 05:13 -0700
Re: Our planet is greener now, vs. 100 years ago. Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-29 19:21 -0400
Re: Our planet is greener now, vs. 100 years ago. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 16:54 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 17:11 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 14:18 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-04-29 09:42 -0400
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 14:21 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-29 07:34 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-04-29 10:43 -0400
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 15:28 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-04-29 13:13 -0400
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 17:37 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 10:44 -0700
Re: Possibly good? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-30 08:15 -0500
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-30 06:36 -0700
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-29 15:29 +0000
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 15:43 +0000
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-29 16:05 +0000
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 16:44 +0000
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-29 17:40 +0000
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 17:58 +0000
Re: Possibly good? "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-04-29 19:24 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 12:43 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 20:26 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 13:46 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-29 20:24 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-29 14:05 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-29 09:23 -0700
Re: Possibly good? a.m <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 12:27 -0400
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-04-28 17:24 +0000
Re: Possibly good? a.m <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 13:44 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 10:54 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 10:56 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-04-28 21:01 +0200
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 12:59 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 20:51 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 13:57 -0700
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-04-28 21:04 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 17:13 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 14:17 -0700
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 03:37 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-30 20:41 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 01:21 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-04-28 17:09 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-28 14:12 -0700
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 03:36 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-30 20:40 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-01 09:26 +0200
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-28 23:13 -0700
Re: Possibly good? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-30 08:19 -0500
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-30 08:04 -0700
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 03:38 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-30 20:42 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-01 09:24 +0200
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-01 05:34 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 02:53 -0700
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 03:34 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-30 20:39 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2018-05-01 09:20 +0200
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-01 05:37 -0400
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-03 21:23 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 14:31 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-03 19:33 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-01 11:11 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 15:17 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-01 19:47 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-02 07:53 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-04-29 09:40 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-04-29 07:03 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-04-29 10:26 -0700
Re: Possibly good? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-30 08:03 -0500
Re: Possibly good? William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2018-04-30 14:14 +0100
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-01 03:44 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 04:43 +0000
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-01 05:28 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 05:36 +0000
Re: Possibly good? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-05-01 06:09 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 07:12 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-05-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 14:56 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-05-01 15:01 +0000
Re: Possibly good? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-01 07:01 -0500
Re: Possibly good? Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-05-01 11:21 -0400
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-01 08:31 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-05-01 19:41 -0400
Re: Possibly good? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-05-03 21:19 +0000
Re: Possibly good? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-05-03 14:27 -0700
Re: Possibly good? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-04-27 18:29 -0700
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Doomsdrzej <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-28 17:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <soo9eddajl7mp0l485ic69foappnb6actc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #449404 |
On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 20:56:18 +0000 (UTC), owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >a.m <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 19:08:58 +0000 (UTC), owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>>Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>> On 4/28/18 9:01 AM, owl wrote: >>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 4/28/18 8:01 AM, a.m wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 17:28:42 -0700, Snit >>>>>>> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/27/18 3:03 PM, F. Russell wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:03:28 -0500, chrisv wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In another month, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation becomes >>>>>>>>>> enforceable. It provides strict requirements >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't know that law so I cannot comment. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But I do know that both European _and_ American politics is >>>>>>>>> REACTIVE rather than PROACTIVE. The politicians should see >>>>>>>>> these things coming far in advance but they never do. Consequently >>>>>>>>> most laws are unfortunately always "too little and too late." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Climate change is a great examples of this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The same scientists who claimed that we'd all be underwater right now >>>>>>> are now admitting that they were wrong. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who said we would be under water? The oceans HAVE risen. The predictions >>>>>> have been amazingly accurate. >>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/950748/climate-change-scientists-impact-not-as-bad-on-planet> >>>>>> >>>>>> You hand-picked one study. One. In the past you have hand-picked some >>>>>> others. But you are hand-picking and ignoring the overall picture... the >>>>>> overall science. You are seeking confirmation bias and finding it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is the essence of "climate science." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As far as you picking and choosing, here is another recent study (or >>>>>> article, from a more scientific source, which talks about the study): >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/we-just-breached-the-410-ppm-threshold-for-co2/> >>>>>> OR <https://goo.gl/nZkZmM> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> The world just passed another round-numbered climate milestone. >>>>>> Scientists predicted it would happen this year and lo and behold, it >>>>>> has. >>>>>> ... >>>>>> Earlier this year, U.K. Met Office scientists issued their >>>>>> first-ever carbon dioxide forecast. They projected carbon dioxide >>>>>> could reach 410 ppm in March and almost certainly would by April. >>>>>> Their forecast has been borne out with Tuesday's daily record. They >>>>>> project that the monthly average will peak near 407 ppm in May, >>>>>> setting a monthly record. >>>>>> >>>>>> Carbon dioxide concentrations have skyrocketed over the past two >>>>>> years due to in part to natural factors like El Nino causing more of >>>>>> it to end up in the atmosphere. But it's mostly driven by the record >>>>>> amounts of carbon dioxide humans are creating by burning fossil >>>>>> fuels. >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>>>> >>>> If you truly want to learn about man-made global climate change go to >>>> any -- literally ANY -- scientific site that states a position. Follow >>>> some of their references to learn more. >>>> >>> >>>I would love to see Antarctica uncovered in my lifetime, and I couldn't >>>care less about Florida. Let that shit sink. >> >> Yes owl, make sure you go to _ANY_ scientific site that states a >> position but makes sure that it states whatever position the Prescott >> cockroach agrees with otherwise go to any _OTHER_ scientific site and >> do the same. If you can't find one that agrees with Michael Glasser, >> make sure that you ask him to send you his pre-approved list of _ANY_ >> scientific site. > >What does snit know about science? He thinks psychology is a science. >You know, that field of "study" that changes its determinations based >on political pressure. Michael Glasser learned everything that he ever needed to know about science during his days as a test subject for psychiatric medicine... to help with his anxiety, obviously.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-28 14:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fkk6odFncojU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #449412 |
On 4/28/18 2:11 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote: > On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 20:56:18 +0000 (UTC), owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> > wrote: > >> a.m <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 19:08:58 +0000 (UTC), owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>> On 4/28/18 9:01 AM, owl wrote: >>>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/28/18 8:01 AM, a.m wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 17:28:42 -0700, Snit >>>>>>>> <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/27/18 3:03 PM, F. Russell wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:03:28 -0500, chrisv wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In another month, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation becomes >>>>>>>>>>> enforceable. It provides strict requirements >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't know that law so I cannot comment. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But I do know that both European _and_ American politics is >>>>>>>>>> REACTIVE rather than PROACTIVE. The politicians should see >>>>>>>>>> these things coming far in advance but they never do. Consequently >>>>>>>>>> most laws are unfortunately always "too little and too late." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Climate change is a great examples of this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The same scientists who claimed that we'd all be underwater right now >>>>>>>> are now admitting that they were wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Who said we would be under water? The oceans HAVE risen. The predictions >>>>>>> have been amazingly accurate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/950748/climate-change-scientists-impact-not-as-bad-on-planet> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You hand-picked one study. One. In the past you have hand-picked some >>>>>>> others. But you are hand-picking and ignoring the overall picture... the >>>>>>> overall science. You are seeking confirmation bias and finding it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That is the essence of "climate science." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As far as you picking and choosing, here is another recent study (or >>>>>>> article, from a more scientific source, which talks about the study): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/we-just-breached-the-410-ppm-threshold-for-co2/> >>>>>>> OR <https://goo.gl/nZkZmM> >>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>> The world just passed another round-numbered climate milestone. >>>>>>> Scientists predicted it would happen this year and lo and behold, it >>>>>>> has. >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> Earlier this year, U.K. Met Office scientists issued their >>>>>>> first-ever carbon dioxide forecast. They projected carbon dioxide >>>>>>> could reach 410 ppm in March and almost certainly would by April. >>>>>>> Their forecast has been borne out with Tuesday's daily record. They >>>>>>> project that the monthly average will peak near 407 ppm in May, >>>>>>> setting a monthly record. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carbon dioxide concentrations have skyrocketed over the past two >>>>>>> years due to in part to natural factors like El Nino causing more of >>>>>>> it to end up in the atmosphere. But it's mostly driven by the record >>>>>>> amounts of carbon dioxide humans are creating by burning fossil >>>>>>> fuels. >>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>>>>> >>>>> If you truly want to learn about man-made global climate change go to >>>>> any -- literally ANY -- scientific site that states a position. Follow >>>>> some of their references to learn more. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I would love to see Antarctica uncovered in my lifetime, and I couldn't >>>> care less about Florida. Let that shit sink. >>> >>> Yes owl, make sure you go to _ANY_ scientific site that states a >>> position but makes sure that it states whatever position the Prescott >>> cockroach agrees with otherwise go to any _OTHER_ scientific site and >>> do the same. If you can't find one that agrees with Michael Glasser, >>> make sure that you ask him to send you his pre-approved list of _ANY_ >>> scientific site. >> >> What does snit know about science? He thinks psychology is a science. >> You know, that field of "study" that changes its determinations based >> on political pressure. > > Michael Glasser learned everything that he ever needed to know about > science during his days as a test subject for psychiatric medicine... > to help with his anxiety, obviously. > You AGAIN prove me right about you. Wow. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 09:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pc4j2p$e1m$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #449355 |
owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > The plants of Earth rejoice! Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". -- The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not. -- Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 14:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vz90b03ga.gvhuo3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449488 |
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> The plants of Earth rejoice! > > Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the > huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". > Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data worldwide on worldwide temperature changes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 07:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11b9cb97-daf1-425a-8ea4-0d59684a0826@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #449490 |
On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 7:21:50 AM UTC-7, owl wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > > owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > > > >> The plants of Earth rejoice! > > > > Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the > > huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". > > > > Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data > worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. Jesus has yet to show how Mac does anything above the basics on Linux. Jerry Stuckle's computer has more hard drives than Jesus's. Jerry Stuckle wins. Jesus loses. So take that, Jesus. Any dreadfully wounded druggie could easily do the same. Both Jerry Stuckle and Jesus had their failures and their erratum. But one played it off as someone else's mistake and didn't do anything too outrageous that could not be re-done in a way that made it look like he had a clue. Too much glue for you, Gluehead. I bet Jesus thinks his wife's life was rough. -- Curious how these posts are made? www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZNxaaKD7-c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 10:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pc4ml7$9mt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #449490 |
owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >> >> Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the >> huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". > > Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data > worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. Huh? I thought they used thermocouple thermometers these days. Does the fossil-fuel industry pay you anything for your anonymous "skepticism"? -- We consider current (1971–2000) and future (2041–2070) average seasonal surface temperature fields from two regional climate models (RCMs) driven by the same atmosphere–ocean general circulation model (GCM) in the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (NARCCAP) Phase II experiment. We analyze the difference between future and current temperature fields for each RCM and include the factor of season, the factor of RCM, and their interaction in a two-way ANOVA model. Noticing that classical ANOVA approaches do not account for spatial dependence, we assume that the main effects and interactions are spatial processes that follow the Spatial Random Effects (SRE) model. This enables us to model the spatial variability through fixed spatial basis functions, and the computations associated with an ANOVA of high-resolution RCM outputs can be carried out without having to resort to approximations. We call the resulting model a spatial two-way ANOVA model. We implement it in a Bayesian framework, and we investigate the variability of climate-change projections over seasons, RCMs, and their interactions. We find that projected temperatures in North America are credibly higher, that the associated warming effects differ in spatial areas and in seasons, and that they are of much larger magnitude than the variability between RCMs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 15:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <szxc0v90bqbq.q@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449493 |
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>> >>> Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the >>> huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". >> >> Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data >> worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. > > Huh? I thought they used thermocouple thermometers these days. > So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put it to good use? > Does the fossil-fuel industry pay you anything for your anonymous > "skepticism"? > Are you afraid that the increase in data points provided by these thermometers would damage your agenda?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 13:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pc4vef$3ne$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #449496 |
owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>> >>>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>>> >>>> Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the >>>> huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". >>> >>> Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data >>> worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. >> >> Huh? I thought they used thermocouple thermometers these days. > > So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put > it to good use? It depends. Some forms of mercury are innocuous. >> Does the fossil-fuel industry pay you anything for your anonymous >> "skepticism"? > > Are you afraid that the increase in data points provided by these > thermometers would damage your agenda? Increase in data points? There are already countless measurements all over the global, though measurements under the ocean could use some more beefing up. Anyway, the way people are acting these days, it wouldn't surprise me if the neurotoxic forms of mercury aren't widespread. For example, we have a president who is mad as a hatter. -- You look tired.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 17:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <spzx08.abuo32@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449533 |
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: > owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>> >>>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>> >>>>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>>>> >>>>> Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the >>>>> huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". >>>> >>>> Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data >>>> worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. >>> >>> Huh? I thought they used thermocouple thermometers these days. >> >> So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put >> it to good use? > > It depends. Some forms of mercury are innocuous. > >>> Does the fossil-fuel industry pay you anything for your anonymous >>> "skepticism"? >> >> Are you afraid that the increase in data points provided by these >> thermometers would damage your agenda? > > Increase in data points? Do you suppose that adding more thermometers would somehow result in a *decrease* in data points? > There are already countless measurements > all over the global, though measurements under the ocean could > use some more beefing up. > > Anyway, the way people are acting these days, it wouldn't > surprise me if the neurotoxic forms of mercury aren't widespread. > For example, we have a president who is mad as a hatter. > And a political party (Democrats) doing everything they can to promote the legalization of recreational drug use.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 10:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fkmekkF7n1eU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #449536 |
On 4/29/18 10:37 AM, owl wrote: > Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>> >>>>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>>>> owl wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The plants of Earth rejoice! >>>>>> >>>>>> Was reading Physics Today the other day. An interesting article about the >>>>>> huge amount of mercury locked up in the "frozen tundra". >>>>> >>>>> Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data >>>>> worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. >>>> >>>> Huh? I thought they used thermocouple thermometers these days. >>> >>> So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put >>> it to good use? >> >> It depends. Some forms of mercury are innocuous. >> >>>> Does the fossil-fuel industry pay you anything for your anonymous >>>> "skepticism"? >>> >>> Are you afraid that the increase in data points provided by these >>> thermometers would damage your agenda? >> >> Increase in data points? > > Do you suppose that adding more thermometers would somehow result > in a *decrease* in data points? Are you just being silly or are you truly failing to understand the multiple issues with your comments? -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-30 08:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4l5eedh53ltkacej56f1a29dtgm1d4dkaf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #449496 |
owl wrote: >So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put >it to good use? Come on, man. That is just plain *stupid*. Sheesh. -- "So when's the last time you went to work for free, you shabby hypocrite?" - DumFSck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven Petruzzellis <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-30 06:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <194e1bb7-2760-4871-814d-d5f89a054204@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #449629 |
On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 6:15:28 AM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: > owl wrote: > > >So you would rather leave that mercury in the environment than put > >it to good use? > > Come on, man. That is just plain *stupid*. > > Sheesh. > > -- > "So when's the last time you went to work for free, you shabby > hypocrite?" - DumFSck I have a macOS system I use as well, but it's something you would not understand. Too much glue for you, gluey. It was The 'The Flooder' Doctor who flooded Vennie Bowden (https://www.bloomtreeprescott.com/staff/Vennie.Bowden)'s site hundreds of thousands of times and pretended he did not do it. - Eight things to never feed your cat https://goo.gl/Fho5Nq http://www.macadvocacy.pw/2005/Nov/09/236626.html Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 15:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pc4od502m4m@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #449490 |
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 14:21:48 +0000, owl wrote: > > Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data > worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. > Every climate change denier that I have encountered has failed to answer this basic scientific question. So let's watch YOU also fail: Great Britain is located at the same latitude as Labrador, yet while Labrador is freezing with frigid cold most of the year Great Britain enjoys a relatively warm and temperate climate. Why is this so? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Another climate change denier shows himself to know NOTHING about climate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 15:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <900zb8albz.a3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449497 |
F. Russell <fr@random.info> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 14:21:48 +0000, owl wrote: > >> >> Good. Now we can make enough thermometers to get accurate data >> worldwide on worldwide temperature changes. >> > > Every climate change denier that I have encountered has failed > to answer this basic scientific question. So let's watch YOU > also fail: > > Great Britain is located at the same latitude as Labrador, > yet while Labrador is freezing with frigid cold most of the year > Great Britain enjoys a relatively warm and temperate climate. > Why is this so? > Ocean currents. Labrador current vs Gulf Stream. > Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Another climate change denier shows > himself to know NOTHING about climate. > Get back in the box. It's Sunday.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 16:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pc4qh501phu@news7.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #449499 |
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 15:43:25 +0000, owl wrote: > > Ocean currents. Labrador current > The Labrador current plays no role and there is no need to invoke it. You just did a frantic Google search. It's too bad that you can't be cornered someplace away from your easy references where your ignorance would shine.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 16:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0a088fb.zbho3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449507 |
F. Russell <fr@random.info> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 15:43:25 +0000, owl wrote: > >> >> Ocean currents. Labrador current >> > > The Labrador current plays no role and there is > no need to invoke it. > LOL! You are a moron. > You just did a frantic Google search. It's too bad > that you can't be cornered someplace away from your > easy references where your ignorance would shine. > I googled the name of the current that is responsible. Everybody (except maybe you) is well aware of the effect that ocean currents have on climate. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-and-where-is-the-labrador-current.html <quote> The cold waters of the Labrador Current thus have a moderating effect on the climate of the coastal lands in its path, making the summers there cooler, and winters more severely cold. </quote>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pc502t12pds@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #449510 |
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 16:44:19 +0000, owl wrote: > <quote> > The cold waters of the Labrador Current > The Labrador current is irrelevant. Only the Gulf Stream is responsible. But the fact that you mentioned BOTH strongly indicates that you performed a hasty search in an attempt to cover up your serious ignorance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 17:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ua0sb00ab.ah33@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #449540 |
F. Russell <fr@random.info> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 16:44:19 +0000, owl wrote: > >> <quote> >> The cold waters of the Labrador Current >> > > The Labrador current is irrelevant. Only the Gulf Stream > is responsible. > You're full of shit. The Labrador Current brings cold waters south along the coast of Labrador. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/Corrientes-oceanicas.png > But the fact that you mentioned BOTH strongly indicates > that you performed a hasty search in an attempt to cover > up your serious ignorance. > The Gulf Stream is famous. There was no need to look that one up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 19:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pc566401vt1@news7.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #449548 |
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:58:23 +0000, owl wrote: > > The Labrador Current brings cold waters > south along the coast of Labrador. > So what? Labrador is NOT the anomaly. The anomaly is Great Britain and most of northern Europe where it is MUCH warmer than it should be. The reason -- and the ONLY reason -- is the transport of tropical heat via the Gulf Stream. The fact that you don't even understand the issue is a further proof of your complete ignorance of global climatic mechanisms. Here is another question which you will fail: Why are there predominantly western winds in the northern temperate zone, while in the northern tropics the winds are easterly?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-29 12:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fkmlihF97ppU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #449558 |
On 4/29/18 12:24 PM, F. Russell wrote: > On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:58:23 +0000, owl wrote: > >> >> The Labrador Current brings cold waters >> south along the coast of Labrador. >> > > So what? Labrador is NOT the anomaly. > > The anomaly is Great Britain and most of northern Europe > where it is MUCH warmer than it should be. The reason -- > and the ONLY reason -- is the transport of tropical heat > via the Gulf Stream. > > The fact that you don't even understand the issue is a > further proof of your complete ignorance of global > climatic mechanisms. > > Here is another question which you will fail: > > Why are there predominantly western winds in the > northern temperate zone, while in the northern tropics > the winds are easterly? > > > He hears "global warming" and assumes this means ALL areas will get warmer when the real meaning is closer to the AVERAGE getting warmer. As that happens water and air current change and cold areas will end up in different places. Overall the oceans are warming and getting more acidic. He is blind to this. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web