Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #585468 > unrolled thread

Uh-oh, spaghettio

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Uh-oh, spaghettio kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:19 -0400
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-06-18 12:57 -0400
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-06-18 17:58 +0000
        Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 14:15 -0400
        Leave It To a Denierrrrr... AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-06-18 17:01 -0500
        Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-20 11:23 -0500
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:34 +0000
      Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-20 10:57 +0200
        Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-20 10:49 -0500
      Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 08:46 -0400
        Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-20 15:43 +0200
          Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 20:41 -0400
          Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 20:53 -0400
            Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-21 11:25 +0200
      Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO2 (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-06-20 16:51 -0500
        Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-21 00:57 +0200
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-19 06:46 +0200
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:47 +0000
        Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-20 07:07 +0200
          Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-21 01:22 +0000
            Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-21 05:37 +0200
              Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-21 20:51 +0000
                Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-22 05:35 +0200
                Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-22 06:40 -0400
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:05 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#585468 — Uh-oh, spaghettio

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years

-- 
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here."                                                     ~Checkmate

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#585476

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:19:47 -0400, kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
>400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years


So?  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?

If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what 
happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of 
atmospheric CO2. 

Duh!


-- 
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my erudite opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the ignorant or
the thin-skinned."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585495

In alt.global-warming Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:19:47 -0400, kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
>>400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years
> So?  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what 
> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of 
> atmospheric CO2. 
> Duh!


So you're saying night follows day but day doesn't follow night?

(Duh!)

-- 
www.skincancer.gov.au/internet/skincancer/publishing.nsf/.../fact-2
30 Jan 2014 ... In 2009, there were 11,545 new cases of melanoma.
In 2010, total deaths from melanoma were 1,452. 
Melanoma is also one of the most ...
[The AUS rate is the highest in the world at c7 per 100k population.
Extrapolating 1/2 of that to the entire planet gives 220,000 people a year 
dying from sunlight-induced cancers.]

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/skincancer-melanoma/detailedguide/melanoma-skin-cancer-key-statistics
Cancer of the skin is by far the most common of all cancers. Melanoma
accounts for less than 2% of skin cancer cases but causes a large
majority of skin cancer deaths.
Here are the American Cancer Society's estimates for melanoma in the
United States for 2014:
* About 76,100 new melanomas will be diagnosed (about 43,890 in men
  and 32,210 in women).
* About 9,710 people are expected to die of melanoma (about 6,470 men
  and 3,240 women).
The rates of melanoma have been rising for at least 30 years.
[Again, extrapolating the US rate to the world gives around 200k annual deaths 
from the most common but least energetic form of DNA-damaging radiation].

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585498

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:58:11 +0000 (UTC), R Kym Horsell wrote:

>In alt.global-warming Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:19:47 -0400, kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
>>>400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years
>> So?  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what 
>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of 
>> atmospheric CO2. 
>> Duh!
>
>
>So you're saying night follows day but day doesn't follow night?
>
>(Duh!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dusk
Dusk occurs at the darkest stage of twilight, or at the very end of
astronomical twilight just before night.

So you would say "sundown follows dusk" because sundown the next day
might occur 23.5 hours after today's dusk.

That is not one of the cuter parts of your private language.

Maybe you could draw the daily sunrise-sunset-dusk-sunrise cycle on a
graph and tell us which most closely follows the other where you live.

Your contention is not even worthy of a Duh.

One might suspect something other than ignorance or stupidity was the
motivation for your post.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585552 — Leave It To a Denierrrrr...

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:58:11 +0000 (UTC),  R Kym Horsell says...  

> 
> In alt.global-warming Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:19:47 -0400, kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> wrote:
> >>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
> >>400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years
> > So?  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
> > that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
> > If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what 
> > happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
> > increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of 
> > atmospheric CO2. 
> > Duh!
> 
> 
> So you're saying night follows day but day doesn't follow night?

So, you're saying that all climate screechers are basement dwelling 
idiots, but not all basement dwelling idiots are climate screechers?

I agree.

http://i.imgur.com/oPMGkOj.jpg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585830

On 6/18/2016 12:58 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:

>
> So you're saying night follows day but day doesn't follow night?
>
> (Duh!)
>


Day follows night in the middle east.



night follows Day in the west.



During Ramadan, Muslims abstain from eating, drinking and having marital 
relations from dawn to dusk.

Elsewhere in the Gulf, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar also 
announced a Thursday start for Ramadan.

The government of Yemen, exiled in Saudi Arabia because of war in their 
homeland, similarly said the holy month would begin Thursday in their 
country.

And in Amman, Jordanian religious authorities said Ramadan would begin 
there on Thursday.

More than 1.5 billion Muslims around the world will mark the month, 
during which believers abstain from eating, drinking, smoking and having 
sex from dawn until sunset.

They also try to avoid evil thoughts and deeds.

Ramadan is sacred to Muslims because tradition says the Koran was 
revealed to their prophet Mohammed during that month.

It is followed by the Eid al-Fitr festival.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585519

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:57:04 -0400, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:19:47 -0400, kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
>>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-
>>400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years
> 
> 
> So?  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda that CO2
> rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
> 
> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what happens. Ice
> core samples prove that FIRST the temperature increases and then it is
> FOLLOWED by increased levels of atmospheric CO2.
> 
> Duh!

Your imitation of Kooky McFakeTard is a miserable and pallid one, Gerggzr.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585808 — Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio)

Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:

> […]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
> 
> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
> atmospheric CO2.

That is an extraordinary claim.  Extraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence.  Cite that evidence.

F'up2 sci.physics

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585827 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂

On 6/20/2016 3:57 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>
>> […]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>
>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>> atmospheric CO2.
>
> That is an extraordinary claim.  Extraordinary claims
> require extraordinary evidence.  Cite that evidence.
>
> F'up2 sci.physics
>

It is in Al Gores movie also, big graph in the back, shows bit temp 
increase, then co2 increase.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585815 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio)

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

>Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>
>> […]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>> 
>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>> atmospheric CO2.
>
>That is an extraordinary claim.  

How so?

It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.

And it is a fact.

>Extraordinary claims
>require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.

http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon
starts to move.


>F'up2 sci.physics

Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585820 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂

Wally W.  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>> […]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>> 
>>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>>> atmospheric CO2.
>>
>>That is an extraordinary claim.
> 
> How so?

There has to be a reason why the atmospheric temperature rises.  So, what do 
you think is the reason?  Denial is not enough in science; you have to come 
with a *sound* *alternative* theory in order to be taken seriously.
 
> It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.

No, it is an unfounded assertion based on spurious interpretation of 
incomplete data, as is shown below.
 
> And it is a fact.

Cite evidence.
 
>>Extraordinary claims
>>require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.
> 
> http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
> After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon
> starts to move.

The *alleged* data for the Vostok ice core temperatures (just *one* specimen 
to explain it all?) in the top graph starts *before* the data for carbon 
dioxide.  It is still possible that CO₂ data not included in the graph 
explains the rising temperature.

These are the composite data for Vostok Dome C:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core#/media/File:Co2_glacial_cycles_800k.png>

And assuming that would not be so, what is then the *reason* for the 
*observable* rise of atmospheric temperature, particularly the one since the 
rise of the Homo sapiens ca. 50'000 years ago, and the extreme one since 
humanity’s industrial age (which is conveniently left out in the graphs as 
they end at 300'000 years ago)?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:TrendsGlobalEmissions.png>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png>

The greenhouse effect is a scientific *fact* (most prominently observed on 
Venus, and the opposite of it on Mars) not disputed even by those who deny 
global warming: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect>

>>F'up2 sci.physics
> 
> Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.

Spoken like a true propagandist and Usenet troll; not like a scientist.

Of the newsgroups crossposted to, sci.physics is the most fitting one in the 
Big 8 (I do not read alt.ALL if I can avoid it).  Actually, though, this 
belongs in sci.geo.ALL; unfortunately, that hierarchy does not have a .misc; 
that leaves only sci.misc.

BTW, your newsreader is either misconfigured or broken.  There was a 
properly encoded subscript 2 (for “CO₂”) in the Subject header field 
value and your newsreader mangled it.  I have restored it now; please
do not mangle it again.

F'up2 sci.misc

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585908 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO?

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:43:34 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

>Wally W.  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>>> [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>>>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>>> 
>>>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>>>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>>>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>>>> atmospheric CO2.
>>>
>>>That is an extraordinary claim.
>> 
>> How so?
>
>There has to be a reason why the atmospheric temperature rises.  

Why does there have to be **a** reason?

Why can't there be more than one?

>So, what do 
>you think is the reason?  Denial is not enough in science; you have to come 
>with a *sound* *alternative* theory in order to be taken seriously.

Only if the theory spewed by the media is credible.
 
>> It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.
>
>No, it is an unfounded assertion based on spurious interpretation of 
>incomplete data, as is shown below.

Where was the interpretation shown to be spurious?
 
>> And it is a fact.
>
>Cite evidence.

Already done. You didn't like it.
 
>>>Extraordinary claims
>>>require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.

Your claim that it is an **extraordinary** claim seems to be tinged by
an agenda.

 
>> http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
>> After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon
>> starts to move.
>
>The *alleged* data for the Vostok ice core temperatures (just *one* specimen 
>to explain it all?) in the top graph starts *before* the data for carbon 
>dioxide.  It is still possible that CO? data not included in the graph 
>explains the rising temperature.
>
>These are the composite data for Vostok Dome C:
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core#/media/File:Co2_glacial_cycles_800k.png>
>
>And assuming that would not be so, what is then the *reason* for the 
>*observable* rise of atmospheric temperature, particularly the one since the 
>rise of the Homo sapiens ca. 50'000 years ago, and the extreme one since 
>humanity’s industrial age (which is conveniently left out in the graphs as 
>they end at 300'000 years ago)?

Wiki is **so** nuetral on the topic of "climate change," isn't it?
/sarc

><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:TrendsGlobalEmissions.png>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png>
>
>The greenhouse effect is a scientific *fact* (most prominently observed on 
>Venus, and the opposite of it on Mars) not disputed even by those who deny 
>global warming: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect>

Most of the elevated temperature on Venus is due to the high
atmospheric pressure. See "adiabatic compression."

Mars has 95 CO2. Why isn't it hot there?

>>>F'up2 sci.physics
>> 
>> Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.
>
>Spoken like a true propagandist and Usenet troll; not like a scientist.

And you are?

>Of the newsgroups crossposted to, sci.physics is the most fitting one in the 
>Big 8 (I do not read alt.ALL if I can avoid it).  Actually, though, this 
>belongs in sci.geo.ALL; unfortunately, that hierarchy does not have a .misc; 
>that leaves only sci.misc.
>
>BTW, your newsreader is either misconfigured or broken.  There was a 
>properly encoded subscript 2 (for “CO?”) in the Subject header field 
>value and your newsreader mangled it.  I have restored it now; please
>do not mangle it again.

My newsreader was chosen for my convenience.

Not everyone is a coding purist.

>F'up2 sci.misc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585914 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO?

Correcting typo in group name that was deleted.

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:43:34 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

>Wally W.  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>>> [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>>>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>>> 
>>>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>>>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>>>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>>>> atmospheric CO2.
>>>
>>>That is an extraordinary claim.
>> 
>> How so?
>
>There has to be a reason why the atmospheric temperature rises.  

Why does there have to be **a** reason?

Why can't there be more than one?

>So, what do 
>you think is the reason?  Denial is not enough in science; you have to come 
>with a *sound* *alternative* theory in order to be taken seriously.

Only if the theory spewed by the media is credible.
 
>> It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.
>
>No, it is an unfounded assertion based on spurious interpretation of 
>incomplete data, as is shown below.

Where was the interpretation shown to be spurious?
 
>> And it is a fact.
>
>Cite evidence.

Already done. You didn't like it.
 
>>>Extraordinary claims
>>>require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.

Your claim that it is an **extraordinary** claim seems to be tinged by
an agenda.

 
>> http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
>> After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon
>> starts to move.
>
>The *alleged* data for the Vostok ice core temperatures (just *one* specimen 
>to explain it all?) in the top graph starts *before* the data for carbon 
>dioxide.  It is still possible that CO? data not included in the graph 
>explains the rising temperature.
>
>These are the composite data for Vostok Dome C:
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core#/media/File:Co2_glacial_cycles_800k.png>
>
>And assuming that would not be so, what is then the *reason* for the 
>*observable* rise of atmospheric temperature, particularly the one since the 
>rise of the Homo sapiens ca. 50'000 years ago, and the extreme one since 
>humanity’s industrial age (which is conveniently left out in the graphs as 
>they end at 300'000 years ago)?

Wiki is **so** nuetral on the topic of "climate change," isn't it?
/sarc

><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:TrendsGlobalEmissions.png>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png>
>
>The greenhouse effect is a scientific *fact* (most prominently observed on 
>Venus, and the opposite of it on Mars) not disputed even by those who deny 
>global warming: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect>

Most of the elevated temperature on Venus is due to the high
atmospheric pressure. See "adiabatic compression."

Mars has 95 CO2. Why isn't it hot there?

>>>F'up2 sci.physics
>> 
>> Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.
>
>Spoken like a true propagandist and Usenet troll; not like a scientist.

And you are?

>Of the newsgroups crossposted to, sci.physics is the most fitting one in the 
>Big 8 (I do not read alt.ALL if I can avoid it).  Actually, though, this 
>belongs in sci.geo.ALL; unfortunately, that hierarchy does not have a .misc; 
>that leaves only sci.misc.
>
>BTW, your newsreader is either misconfigured or broken.  There was a 
>properly encoded subscript 2 (for “CO?”) in the Subject header field 
>value and your newsreader mangled it.  I have restored it now; please
>do not mangle it again.

My newsreader was chosen for my convenience.

Not everyone is a coding purist.

>F'up2 sci.misc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585966 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂

Wally W.  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:43:34 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Wally W.  wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>>>> [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>>>>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>>>>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>>>>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>>>>> atmospheric CO2.
>>>>That is an extraordinary claim.
>>> How so?
>> There has to be a reason why the atmospheric temperature rises.
> 
> Why does there have to be **a** reason?
> 
> Why can't there be more than one?

You have yet to come up with one.
 
>> So, what do you think is the reason?  Denial is not enough in science;
>> you have to come with a *sound* *alternative* theory in order to be taken
>> seriously.
> 
> Only if the theory spewed by the media is credible.

It is _not_ such a theory, and it has been confirmed by observation.
  
>>> It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.
>>
>>No, it is an unfounded assertion based on spurious interpretation of
>>incomplete data, as is shown below.
> 
> Where was the interpretation shown to be spurious?

The argument was made by the proponent that it would not matter that the 
rise in CO₂ follows the rise in temperature based on a graph that featured 
no CO₂ data back to where the temperature data started.  Also, the graphs 
conveniently ended long before the rise of the Homo sapiens.
  
>>> And it is a fact.
>> Cite evidence.
> 
> Already done. You didn't like it.

No, I did not take it seriously because the facts were bent to fit the 
theory.  Big difference.
  
>>>> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that
>>>> evidence.
> 
> Your claim that it is an **extraordinary** claim seems to be tinged by
> an agenda.

Not at all.  The physics of the greenhouse effect is well understood by now.

> Wiki is **so** nuetral on the topic of "climate change," isn't it?
> /sarc

The unfounded opinion of a few science cranks does not change the 
observations.
 
>> The greenhouse effect is a scientific *fact* (most prominently observed 
>> on Venus, and the opposite of it on Mars) not disputed even by those who
>> deny global warming: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect>
> 
> Most of the elevated temperature on Venus is due to the high
> atmospheric pressure.

No, it is not.

> See "adiabatic compression."

Fallacy.  Venus is not an isolated system.

> Mars has 95 CO2.

Mars’ *atmosphere* is composed of ca. _96_ % _CO₂_.

> Why isn't it hot there?

I give you a hint: Humans need a *spacesuit* to survive on Mars.  Why?
 
>>>> F'up2 sci.physics
>>> Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.
>> Spoken like a true propagandist and Usenet troll; not like a scientist.
> 
> And you are?

I am not a person who claims other people’s opinions are “bullshit”.
I am not a person who continues to crosspost across alt.ALL and the Big 8 
*without* Followup-to despite F'up2 being set.
 
>> Of the newsgroups crossposted to, sci.physics is the most fitting one in
>> the Big 8 (I do not read alt.ALL if I can avoid it).  Actually, though,
>> this belongs in sci.geo.ALL; unfortunately, that hierarchy does not have 
>> a .misc; that leaves only sci.misc.
>>
>> BTW, your newsreader is either misconfigured or broken.  There was a
>> properly encoded subscript 2 (for “CO?”) in the Subject header field
>> value and your newsreader mangled it.  I have restored it now; please
>> do not mangle it again.
> 
> My newsreader was chosen for my convenience.

So, to you, your needs are more important than those of the rest of the 
world.  That is *precisely* the kind of irresponsible behavior that has 
brought this planet to this state.
 
> Not everyone is a coding purist.

This has nothing to do with coding; it has to do with your violating network 
standards, and making discussions harder for everyone else, by using broken 
software (despite being notified of that).

F'up2 sci.misc

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585878 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO2 (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio)

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200,  Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn says...  

> > [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
> > that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
> > 
> > If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
> > happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
> > increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
> > atmospheric CO2.
> 
> That is an extraordinary claim.  Extraordinary claims
> require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.

"Extraordinary" evivence (sic)? You mean "extraordinary" to laymen? 
There's nothing extraordinary about carbon dating CO² trapped in ice.

I'm not sure who or what you're replying to or asking the question of, but 
I'll post this one scientist, (are YOU a scientist?) who works with ice 
core samples and IS a paleo-climatologist, who HAS evivence (sic) that CO² 
release, does in fact, follows temperature rises.

Are YOU a paleo-climatologist?   

I'll include the lies that that well-known scientist, Al Gore, told, just 
show a contradictory side of the argument.

http://tinypic.com/r/2vmwntd/9

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585895 — Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂

AlleyCat wrote:
^^^^^^^^
You are not expecting me to take you seriously, are you?

> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200,  Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn says...
>> > [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>> > that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>> > 
>> > If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>> > happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>> > increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>> > atmospheric CO2.
>> 
>> That is an extraordinary claim.  Extraordinary claims
>> require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that evidence.
> 
> "Extraordinary" evivence (sic)?

You are replying to a posting that had been superseded by a correct one 
almost 13 hours before you replied.

> You mean "extraordinary" to laymen?
> There's nothing extraordinary about carbon dating CO² trapped in ice.

Straw man.
 
> I'm not sure who or what you're replying to or asking the question of,

Proper quoting would have helped you to see that.  There was an attribution 
line in my posting that you did not quote.

> but I'll post this one scientist,

Just one?  How many scientists, how many findings described in how many 
papers, support the theory of global warming?

> (are YOU a scientist?)

By interest, education, and degree, but not working at or for an institution 
of higher education.

> who works with ice core samples and IS a paleo-climatologist, who HAS
> evivence (sic)

When there are no good arguments, spelling errors (corrected long before) 
provide a convenient target.

> that CO² release,

Release to where?

> does in fact, follows temperature rises.

You, too, have to answer the question: Where does the rise of temperature 
come from?
 
> Are YOU a paleo-climatologist?

No.  Are *you*?  Is it even relevant?  Does one have to be a cow to tell if 
the milk is sour?

> I'll include the lies that that well-known scientist, Al Gore, told, just
> show a contradictory side of the argument.

The IPCC consisting of hundreds of climatologists happen to say the same 
that Al Gore said.  Why do you think that is?
 
> http://tinypic.com/r/2vmwntd/9

You are not expecting me to take this seriously, are you?  First of all, 
what is said in that video without clear authorship is based on the false 
premise that the theory of global warming is solely based on what Al Gore 
said in the movie “An Inconvenient Truth”.  Ex falso quodlibet.

Second, the Vostok ice core argument has been disproved by me almost 8 hours 
before you replied, in <news:2525334.e9J7NaK4W3@PointedEars.de>.  I have yet 
to encounter such a lousy newsfeed.

So, “good morning, sunshine!”  (No pun intended.)


Your newsreader, too, is apparently misconfigured or borken.  There was a 
properly encoded _subscript_ 2 in the Subject header field value (which I 
have now restored).  If your newsreader, apparently MicroPlanet Gravity 
3.0.4, does not support MIME, and mangles characters instead, it is unfit 
for Usenet since November 2009; see RFC 5536, § 2.3.  As that version had 
been released on *September* 12, *2010*, it would have to be considered 
*buggy*.

F'up2 sci.misc

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585632

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raper, socked up as ko0oki
kensi the lunkheaded libtard, in <news:nk3sb7$7tc$1@gioia.aioe.org>
did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years

That must be why temperatures in Antarctica have been trending down...
because after all, CO2 has been proven to cause global *cooling* by
none other than NASA.

That must be why sea level is falling as Antarctica has been
adding an average 112 billion tons of ice per year and temperature has
fallen by 0.019 C / decade... and has been for nearly 25 years,
Paul...

<http://data.remss.com/msu/graphics/TLT/plots/RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Southern%20Polar_Land_And_Sea_v03_3.png>
<https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/>

<http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/Workshops/SeaLevel/Posters/3_14_Willis.pdf>
"Recent decrease in upper ocean thermosteric sea level
Recently updated estimates based on in situ profile data show a
decrease in globally averaged, 0/750 m thermosteric sea level between
2003 and 2005 of approximately 7 mm. The decrease in thermosteric sea
level is due to a loss of approximately 3.2 x 10^22 J of heat from the
upper-ocean during this period (Lyman et al., 2006)."

Whoopsie... isn't that the same time period when you Klimate
Katastrophe Kooks were k'laming that ocean heat content took off at a
rate that was 24 times faster than the 1950 to 2000 average? LOL

Does... does that say sea level *dropped* by 7 mm due to water
contraction due to temperature decrease? LOL

SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping
unemployable welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL

<http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/PLA_21192_proofs_plusFigs1_2.pdf>
"In an earlier study of ocean heat content (OHC) we showed that
Earth's empirically implied radiation imbalance has undergone abrupt
changes. Other studies have identified additional such climate shifts
since 1950. The shifts can be correlated with features in recently
updated OHC data. The implied radiation imbalance may possibly
alternate in sign at dates close to the climate shifts. The most
recent shifts occurred during 2001 – 2002 and 2008 – 2009. The implied
radiation imbalance between these dates, in the direction of ocean
heat loss, was −0.03 +- 0.06 W/m^2, with a possible systematic error
of [−0.00,+0.09] W/m^2."

WTF?! Does that study say the radiation imbalance is *negative*? And
that the oceans are *losing* heat? LOL

Hmmm... and the sun's activity is now lower than the Dalton Minimum,
projected to go lower than the Maunder Minimum... you remember the
Maunder Minimum... it precipitated the Little Ice Age.

SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping
unemployable welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL

<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL066749/full>
==============================================================
As the surface is generally warmer than the atmosphere, the total
long-wave emission to space is commonly less than the surface
emission. However, this does not hold true for the high elevated areas
of central Antarctica. For this region, the emission to space is
higher than the surface emission; and the greenhouse effect of CO2 is
around zero or even negative, which has not been discussed so far.
==============================================================

Does... does that say that CO2 acts as a *negative* feedback in
Antarctica, Paul?

SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping
unemployable welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL

<http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/>
==============================================================
"Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats", explains
James Russell of Hampton University, SABER's principal investigator.
"When the upper atmosphere (or 'thermosphere') heats up, these
molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space."

For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere
absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO,
the two most efficient _coolants_ in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95%
of that total back into space.
==============================================================

<https://i0.wp.com/i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r565/Keyell/SpectralCoolingRates_zps27867ef4.png>
Notice how CO2 has a cooling effect right from the lower stratosphere
and up into the mesosphere, its peak cooling effect around the
stratopause, while ozone has a clear warming effect in the lower
stratosphere (and even into the troposphere) but a cooling effect like
CO2 in the middle and upper stratosphere.

Cooling of Atmosphere Due to CO2 Emission
Rudolf W. Gunnerman Energy and Environment Laboratory; University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA; Institute of
Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.306.3621&rep=rep1&type=pdf>
"The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the
temperature of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory
of greenhouse effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere results in cooling rather than warming of the Earth's
atmosphere."

And global cooling has been occurring...

<http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/06/26/study-that-warned-of-global-warming-over-past-decade-ridiculed-after-temperatures-drop/>
The UK Met trend shows an accelerating -0.014 C per decade *decrease*.

Message-ID: <e46a4017e5a77519d1489cd3f1129c08@dizum.com>
The actual underlying (read: unmanipulated) NOAA data shows a 0.6186 F
*decrease* from 2005 to 2015.

<http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI>
Dr. Don Easterbrook shows the past global warming was solar and
orbital forcing induced, the conditions have changed, and global
cooling has set in... since 1998.

<http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.

Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since ~1998.
*Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been dropping for ~17
years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied to for ~17 years:
<http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>

Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in recent
years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack Machine
archived it):
<http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic... *falling*
temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.

"There has been no warming since '98, and a very slight cooling that
is not statistically significant." - Phil Jones, professor at the
School of Environmental Sciences at the scandal-rocked University of
East Anglia.

<http://phys.org/news/2014-08-global-temperature-conundrum-cooling-climate.html>
"We have been building models and there are now robust
contradictions," says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for
Climatic Research. "Data from observation says global cooling. The
physical model says it has to be warming."

===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
<http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>

"I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both global
warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real public
relations problem for us."  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from
scandal-rocked University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely
out of the bag.

You'll note he doesn't say "global cooling", he specifically says "an
ice age"... that's telling, don't you think? LOL
===============================================================

SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping
unemployable welfare-mooching shroomtard, who can't refute the reality
I promulgate.

<snicker>


Whoopsie... did Paul G. Derbyshire the goat-raping shroomtard get
outed *again*? Didn't you k'lame you were in Europe, Paul? LOL

Date: 03 May 2016
MID: <ng9mdq$m43$33@dont-email.me>
MD5: 28e199bc366b04f624161a7e7c6d9ee6
IP: 67.70.57.221
Location: Deep River, ON, Canada

Date: 10 Jun 2016
MID: <njf6m0$9i5$13@dont-email.me>
MD5: 5a7d8d855af84388d01b7dc826ef09d4
IP: 67.70.57.173
Location: Deep River, ON, Canada

Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul G.
Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada by Ray Banana. When Kensi D.
LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and
k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke.
LOL!

Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ>

From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>
Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at
this Usenet thing?
Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="67.70.58.178"; logging-data="29843";
Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock
puppets
Keywords: Murphy
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
========================================================
========================================================

Adding the Injection-Info: header into an E-S post gets it rejected.
Go on, Derbyshire, do it again, if you claim to be able to do it at
will.

Make it exactly this:
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1.1.1.1";
logging-data="29843";

Well, Paul? We're waiting. <tap, tap, tap> Nothing, Paul?

<snicker>

Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800>

Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by
coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda,
apparently.

And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team
on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole.

Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada is a life-long virgin,
you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a
Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's
hooker-pink lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle.
Ironically, he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in
the sack... an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so
deeply it pokes out of her mouth!

Oh, here's Kensi:
<http://goo.gl/hdpXFC>

She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy?
I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice.

Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right
thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too.

<https://goo.gl/sbdRcq>

You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to
say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls
"sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go
kinky. LOL

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ>

> P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited 
> any good telescopes lately?

Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control
capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right?

<snicker>
========================================================
========================================================

Everyone is laughing at you, Paul Derbyshire. Everyone.

Spankard. ShroomTard. Failure.

<snicker>

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/carleton.chat.suggestions/XxE2PVnleGs>
Subject: The Derbyshire Saga
================================================================
[ Posted on Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:39:04 GMT ]

Ok, kids... here's the voice from the cheap seats, on the Derbyshire
Saga (tm).

Now, having read about young Paul (the short, whiny, irritating,
psychotic child that he is) having been dragged from a lab by "the
man", I can only assume that this little story occurred a) yesterday,
and b) in the Steacie building.

The coincidence of two such occurrences cropping up in the same day
"here in the trailer park" would be just too far out to contemplate.

It would seem, then, that young Paul Derbyshire is taking first year
chemistry. As an aside, I'll note that this isn't his first little
"fling" with the department. Shortly before Christmas, the undergrads
had their lab techniques exam. Paul, to whom we can add "clumsy" as
one of his many ignoble traits, couldn't perform under pressure
(begging the question...). Long story short:  He flipped... lost it
completely. Started swearing first at the proctors, then at the lab
supervisor, and lastly, after having been ejected from the lab, lashed
out at the department Chair. (Oh, yes, cursing, swearing, threatening,
the whole nine yards.)

Btw, this goes partly to the issue of "why didn't the TA in question
squash Mr. Derbyshire like a bug?". Since the repercussions could've
been significant.

In any event:  Yesterday, Paul spilled something in the lab. He
refused to clean it up. (I believe his exact words were "I am not a
human mop.". He kept asking other students to clean up his mess, and
became obstinate when pushed to take care of it himself. When he
started screaming and ranting, the lab supervisor called security on
him.

The fellow who responded is a human mountain named Al. Really nice
guy. Anyway, Paul was standing at the sink with a corrosive solution
in a flask, and refused to leave. "I'm busy, can you come back when
I'm not so busy" is the purported comment he made. Al refused to
apprehend him until the chemicals were secured, so, with security and
the lab supervisor watching, Paul returned to his bench, and continued
his experiment. This involved clamping the offending flask, at which
time Al moved in for the kill (so to speak).

Paul struggled, and managed to punch Al in the face (knocking off his
hat!). Al became... vexed, shall we say, and grabbed Paul by the neck
in a sort of headlock. (If you can imagine tiny Paul hanging, feet
kicking, whilst Al lifts him from behind with one arm around the neck
you have the proper picture.) Al then removed him from the lab, put
him on the ground, and proceeded to cuff him.

(Paul:  "what are you doing!?")

Al calls for backup at some point.

Al: "540, this is 8, I need backup for a..." etc.

Paul:  "Talking in police code doesn't make you any better than me."

Note:  All Paul comments were in a Sam Kinison-like screech at this
point.

Campus security backup arrives, as to the "real cops". They mention to
Paul that he's going "downtown" where he will be their guest for "a
long time". As he is being dragged out of the building, Paul is
screaming "What do you mean 'a long time'? I have things to do
tonight!"

Well... sorry if my prose isn't the greatest.  The story is much
better with voice-over, and particularly when you know all the people
involved. (except Paul, of course). I heard it first hand from a guy
in my lab who witnessed the whole event, btw. He does great Sam
Kinison impersonations.

I hear Paul is now the proud owner of a "No Trespass" restraining
order to keep him from the premises of Carleton University.

Semper Inquirens  (thx, Corey)
================================================================

Brian Publicover wrote:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/carleton.chat.suggestions/XxE2PVnleGs/lS73j-DcD04J>
================================================================
I remember in grade 8 Paul once threw a chair at my head because I
suggested that he liked girls (he used to hate females when he was
younger). This was not an isolated incident: I've seen him attack many
people. I don't think he's dangerous (unless he is holding corrosive
chemicals), but I'd hardly call these incidents "bizarre quirks."
================================================================

Awww, poor bootfucked little kooktard Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke,
Ontario, Canada has to relive his horrible past all over again... on
top of having his stoooopid ass drop-kicked across Usenet each and
every day. LOL

And now he's been outed as a dude who likes wearing dresses. And 
raping goats. LOL!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585729

At a quarter to one in the morning, the pressure in the Kookoogalla 
Aquifer could not longer be contained, and the crimped frothnozzle burst 
open:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raper, socked up as ko0oki
> kensi the lunkheaded libtard, in <news:nk3sb7$7tc$1@gioia.aioe.org> did
> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
>> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-
hits-400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years
> 
> That must be why temperatures in Antarctica have been trending down...
> because after all, CO2 has been proven to cause global *cooling* by none
> other than NASA.
> 
> That must be why sea level is falling as Antarctica has been adding an
> average 112 billion tons of ice per year and temperature has fallen by
> 0.019 C / decade... and has been for nearly 25 years, Paul...
> 
> <http://data.remss.com/msu/graphics/TLT/plots/
RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Southern%20Polar_Land_And_Sea_v03_3.png>
> <https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-
antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/>
> 
> <http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/Workshops/SeaLevel/Posters/3_14_Willis.pdf>
> "Recent decrease in upper ocean thermosteric sea level Recently updated
> estimates based on in situ profile data show a decrease in globally
> averaged, 0/750 m thermosteric sea level between 2003 and 2005 of
> approximately 7 mm. The decrease in thermosteric sea level is due to a
> loss of approximately 3.2 x 10^22 J of heat from the upper-ocean during
> this period (Lyman et al., 2006)."
> 
> Whoopsie... isn't that the same time period when you Klimate Katastrophe
> Kooks were k'laming that ocean heat content took off at a rate that was
> 24 times faster than the 1950 to 2000 average? LOL
> 
> Does... does that say sea level *dropped* by 7 mm due to water
> contraction due to temperature decrease? LOL
> 
> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
> 
> <http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/
PLA_21192_proofs_plusFigs1_2.pdf>
> "In an earlier study of ocean heat content (OHC) we showed that Earth's
> empirically implied radiation imbalance has undergone abrupt changes.
> Other studies have identified additional such climate shifts since 1950.
> The shifts can be correlated with features in recently updated OHC data.
> The implied radiation imbalance may possibly alternate in sign at dates
> close to the climate shifts. The most recent shifts occurred during 2001
> – 2002 and 2008 – 2009. The implied radiation imbalance between these
> dates, in the direction of ocean heat loss, was −0.03 +- 0.06 W/m^2,
> with a possible systematic error of [−0.00,+0.09] W/m^2."
> 
> WTF?! Does that study say the radiation imbalance is *negative*? And
> that the oceans are *losing* heat? LOL
> 
> Hmmm... and the sun's activity is now lower than the Dalton Minimum,
> projected to go lower than the Maunder Minimum... you remember the
> Maunder Minimum... it precipitated the Little Ice Age.
> 
> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
> 
> <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL066749/full>
> ============================================================== As the
> surface is generally warmer than the atmosphere, the total long-wave
> emission to space is commonly less than the surface emission. However,
> this does not hold true for the high elevated areas of central
> Antarctica. For this region, the emission to space is higher than the
> surface emission; and the greenhouse effect of CO2 is around zero or
> even negative, which has not been discussed so far.
> ==============================================================
> 
> Does... does that say that CO2 acts as a *negative* feedback in
> Antarctica, Paul?
> 
> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
> 
> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/>
> ============================================================== "Carbon
> dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats", explains James
> Russell of Hampton University, SABER's principal investigator. "When the
> upper atmosphere (or 'thermosphere') heats up, these molecules try as
> hard as they can to shed that heat back into space."
> 
> For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere
> absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO,
> the two most efficient _coolants_ in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95%
> of that total back into space.
> ==============================================================
> 
> <https://i0.wp.com/i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r565/Keyell/
SpectralCoolingRates_zps27867ef4.png>
> Notice how CO2 has a cooling effect right from the lower stratosphere
> and up into the mesosphere, its peak cooling effect around the
> stratopause, while ozone has a clear warming effect in the lower
> stratosphere (and even into the troposphere) but a cooling effect like
> CO2 in the middle and upper stratosphere.
> 
> Cooling of Atmosphere Due to CO2 Emission Rudolf W. Gunnerman Energy and
> Environment Laboratory; University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
> California, USA; Institute of Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences,
> Moscow, Russia
> <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.306.3621&rep=rep1&type=pdf>
> "The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the temperature
> of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory of greenhouse
> effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere results
> in cooling rather than warming of the Earth's atmosphere."
> 
> And global cooling has been occurring...
> 
> <http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/06/26/study-that-warned-of-global-
warming-over-past-decade-ridiculed-after-temperatures-drop/>
> The UK Met trend shows an accelerating -0.014 C per decade *decrease*.
> 
> Message-ID: <e46a4017e5a77519d1489cd3f1129c08@dizum.com> The actual
> underlying (read: unmanipulated) NOAA data shows a 0.6186 F *decrease*
> from 2005 to 2015.
> 
> <http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI> Dr. Don Easterbrook shows
> the past global warming was solar and orbital forcing induced, the
> conditions have changed, and global cooling has set in... since 1998.
> 
> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-
warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
> 
> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since ~1998.
> *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been dropping for ~17
> years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied to for ~17 years:
> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/
Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
> 
> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com> Even NASA
> admitted that global temperatures were falling in recent years (before
> they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack Machine archived it):
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/
research/methane/greenhouse.html>
> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic... *falling*
> temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
> 
> "There has been no warming since '98, and a very slight cooling that is
> not statistically significant." - Phil Jones, professor at the School of
> Environmental Sciences at the scandal-rocked University of East Anglia.
> 
> <http://phys.org/news/2014-08-global-temperature-conundrum-cooling-
climate.html>
> "We have been building models and there are now robust contradictions,"
> says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research.
> "Data from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it
> has to be warming."
> 
> =============================================================== Taken
> from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-
science.html>
> 
> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both global
> warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real public relations
> problem for us."  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
> 
> You'll note he doesn't say "global cooling", he specifically says "an
> ice age"... that's telling, don't you think? LOL
> ===============================================================
> 
> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
> welfare-mooching shroomtard, who can't refute the reality I promulgate.
> 
> <snicker>
> 
> 
> Whoopsie... did Paul G. Derbyshire the goat-raping shroomtard get outed
> *again*? Didn't you k'lame you were in Europe, Paul? LOL
> 
> Date: 03 May 2016
> MID: <ng9mdq$m43$33@dont-email.me>
> MD5: 28e199bc366b04f624161a7e7c6d9ee6 IP: 67.70.57.221
> Location: Deep River, ON, Canada
> 
> Date: 10 Jun 2016
> MID: <njf6m0$9i5$13@dont-email.me>
> MD5: 5a7d8d855af84388d01b7dc826ef09d4 IP: 67.70.57.173
> Location: Deep River, ON, Canada
> 
> Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul G.
> Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada by Ray Banana. When Kensi D.
> LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and
> k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke.
> LOL!
> 
> Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com>
> ========================================================
> ========================================================
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/
yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ>
> 
> From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much
> does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at this Usenet thing?
> Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me> Injection-Date: Sat, 4 May 2013
> 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
> posting-host="67.70.58.178"; logging-data="29843"; Summary: Murphy is a
> kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock puppets
> Keywords: Murphy
> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
> ========================================================
> ========================================================
> 
> Adding the Injection-Info: header into an E-S post gets it rejected. Go
> on, Derbyshire, do it again, if you claim to be able to do it at will.
> 
> Make it exactly this:
> Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1.1.1.1";
> logging-data="29843";
> 
> Well, Paul? We're waiting. <tap, tap, tap> Nothing, Paul?
> 
> <snicker>
> 
> Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com>
> ========================================================
> ========================================================
>> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800>
> 
> Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by
> coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda,
> apparently.
> 
> And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team on
> Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole.
> 
> Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada is a life-long virgin,
> you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a
> Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's hooker-pink
> lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle. Ironically,
> he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in the sack...
> an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so deeply it pokes
> out of her mouth!
> 
> Oh, here's Kensi:
> <http://goo.gl/hdpXFC>
> 
> She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy?
> I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice.
> 
> Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right
> thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too.
> 
> <https://goo.gl/sbdRcq>
> 
> You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to
> say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls
> "sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go
> kinky. LOL
> 
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ>
> 
>> P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited any good
>> telescopes lately?
> 
> Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control
> capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right?
> 
> <snicker>
> ========================================================
> ========================================================
> 
> Everyone is laughing at you, Paul Derbyshire. Everyone.
> 
> Spankard. ShroomTard. Failure.
> 
> <snicker>
> 
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/carleton.chat.suggestions/
XxE2PVnleGs>
> Subject: The Derbyshire Saga
> ================================================================ [
> Posted on Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:39:04 GMT ]
> 
> Ok, kids... here's the voice from the cheap seats, on the Derbyshire
> Saga (tm).
> 
> Now, having read about young Paul (the short, whiny, irritating,
> psychotic child that he is) having been dragged from a lab by "the man",
> I can only assume that this little story occurred a) yesterday, and b)
> in the Steacie building.
> 
> The coincidence of two such occurrences cropping up in the same day
> "here in the trailer park" would be just too far out to contemplate.
> 
> It would seem, then, that young Paul Derbyshire is taking first year
> chemistry. As an aside, I'll note that this isn't his first little
> "fling" with the department. Shortly before Christmas, the undergrads
> had their lab techniques exam. Paul, to whom we can add "clumsy" as one
> of his many ignoble traits, couldn't perform under pressure (begging the
> question...). Long story short:  He flipped... lost it completely.
> Started swearing first at the proctors, then at the lab supervisor, and
> lastly, after having been ejected from the lab, lashed out at the
> department Chair. (Oh, yes, cursing, swearing, threatening, the whole
> nine yards.)
> 
> Btw, this goes partly to the issue of "why didn't the TA in question
> squash Mr. Derbyshire like a bug?". Since the repercussions could've
> been significant.
> 
> In any event:  Yesterday, Paul spilled something in the lab. He refused
> to clean it up. (I believe his exact words were "I am not a human mop.".
> He kept asking other students to clean up his mess, and became obstinate
> when pushed to take care of it himself. When he started screaming and
> ranting, the lab supervisor called security on him.
> 
> The fellow who responded is a human mountain named Al. Really nice guy.
> Anyway, Paul was standing at the sink with a corrosive solution in a
> flask, and refused to leave. "I'm busy, can you come back when I'm not
> so busy" is the purported comment he made. Al refused to apprehend him
> until the chemicals were secured, so, with security and the lab
> supervisor watching, Paul returned to his bench, and continued his
> experiment. This involved clamping the offending flask, at which time Al
> moved in for the kill (so to speak).
> 
> Paul struggled, and managed to punch Al in the face (knocking off his
> hat!). Al became... vexed, shall we say, and grabbed Paul by the neck in
> a sort of headlock. (If you can imagine tiny Paul hanging, feet kicking,
> whilst Al lifts him from behind with one arm around the neck you have
> the proper picture.) Al then removed him from the lab, put him on the
> ground, and proceeded to cuff him.
> 
> (Paul:  "what are you doing!?")
> 
> Al calls for backup at some point.
> 
> Al: "540, this is 8, I need backup for a..." etc.
> 
> Paul:  "Talking in police code doesn't make you any better than me."
> 
> Note:  All Paul comments were in a Sam Kinison-like screech at this
> point.
> 
> Campus security backup arrives, as to the "real cops". They mention to
> Paul that he's going "downtown" where he will be their guest for "a long
> time". As he is being dragged out of the building, Paul is screaming
> "What do you mean 'a long time'? I have things to do tonight!"
> 
> Well... sorry if my prose isn't the greatest.  The story is much better
> with voice-over, and particularly when you know all the people involved.
> (except Paul, of course). I heard it first hand from a guy in my lab who
> witnessed the whole event, btw. He does great Sam Kinison
> impersonations.
> 
> I hear Paul is now the proud owner of a "No Trespass" restraining order
> to keep him from the premises of Carleton University.
> 
> Semper Inquirens  (thx, Corey)
> ================================================================
> 
> Brian Publicover wrote:
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/carleton.chat.suggestions/
XxE2PVnleGs/lS73j-DcD04J>
> ================================================================ I
> remember in grade 8 Paul once threw a chair at my head because I
> suggested that he liked girls (he used to hate females when he was
> younger). This was not an isolated incident: I've seen him attack many
> people. I don't think he's dangerous (unless he is holding corrosive
> chemicals), but I'd hardly call these incidents "bizarre quirks."
> ================================================================
> 
> Awww, poor bootfucked little kooktard Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke,
> Ontario, Canada has to relive his horrible past all over again... on top
> of having his stoooopid ass drop-kicked across Usenet each and every
> day. LOL
> 
> And now he's been outed as a dude who likes wearing dresses. And raping
> goats. LOL!

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Stratospheric-Cooling-and-Tropospheric-
Warming.html

Kook.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585789

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raper, socked up as Nadegda,
in <news:nk70c6$3qm$38@dont-email.me> did thusly jump head first into
the wood chipper again:

> At a quarter to one in the morning

Wrong. Still too stupid to figure out time zones, Paul Derbyshire? LOL

>> Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raper, socked up as ko0oki
>> kensi the lunkheaded libtard, in <news:nk3sb7$7tc$1@gioia.aioe.org> did
>> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/antarctic-co2-hits-400ppm-for-first-time-in-4m-years

>> That must be why temperatures in Antarctica have been trending down...
>> because after all, CO2 has been proven to cause global *cooling* by none
>> other than NASA.
>> 
>> That must be why sea level is falling as Antarctica has been adding an
>> average 112 billion tons of ice per year and temperature has fallen by
>> 0.019 C / decade... and has been for nearly 25 years, Paul...
>> 
>> <http://data.remss.com/msu/graphics/TLT/plots/RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Southern%20Polar_Land_And_Sea_v03_3.png>
>> <https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/>
>> 
>> <http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/Workshops/SeaLevel/Posters/3_14_Willis.pdf>
>> "Recent decrease in upper ocean thermosteric sea level Recently updated
>> estimates based on in situ profile data show a decrease in globally
>> averaged, 0/750 m thermosteric sea level between 2003 and 2005 of
>> approximately 7 mm. The decrease in thermosteric sea level is due to a
>> loss of approximately 3.2 x 10^22 J of heat from the upper-ocean during
>> this period (Lyman et al., 2006)."
>> 
>> Whoopsie... isn't that the same time period when you Klimate Katastrophe
>> Kooks were k'laming that ocean heat content took off at a rate that was
>> 24 times faster than the 1950 to 2000 average? LOL
>> 
>> Does... does that say sea level *dropped* by 7 mm due to water
>> contraction due to temperature decrease? LOL
>> 
>> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
>> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
>> 
>> <http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/PLA_21192_proofs_plusFigs1_2.pdf>
>> "In an earlier study of ocean heat content (OHC) we showed that Earth's
>> empirically implied radiation imbalance has undergone abrupt changes.
>> Other studies have identified additional such climate shifts since 1950.
>> The shifts can be correlated with features in recently updated OHC data.
>> The implied radiation imbalance may possibly alternate in sign at dates
>> close to the climate shifts. The most recent shifts occurred during 2001
>> – 2002 and 2008 – 2009. The implied radiation imbalance between these
>> dates, in the direction of ocean heat loss, was −0.03 +- 0.06 W/m^2,
>> with a possible systematic error of [−0.00,+0.09] W/m^2."
>> 
>> WTF?! Does that study say the radiation imbalance is *negative*? And
>> that the oceans are *losing* heat? LOL
>> 
>> Hmmm... and the sun's activity is now lower than the Dalton Minimum,
>> projected to go lower than the Maunder Minimum... you remember the
>> Maunder Minimum... it precipitated the Little Ice Age.
>> 
>> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
>> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
>> 
>> <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL066749/full>
>> ============================================================== As the
>> surface is generally warmer than the atmosphere, the total long-wave
>> emission to space is commonly less than the surface emission. However,
>> this does not hold true for the high elevated areas of central
>> Antarctica. For this region, the emission to space is higher than the
>> surface emission; and the greenhouse effect of CO2 is around zero or
>> even negative, which has not been discussed so far.
>> ==============================================================
>> 
>> Does... does that say that CO2 acts as a *negative* feedback in
>> Antarctica, Paul?
>> 
>> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
>> welfare-mooching shroomtard. LOL
>> 
>> <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/>
>> ==============================================================
>> "Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats", explains James
>> Russell of Hampton University, SABER's principal investigator. "When the
>> upper atmosphere (or 'thermosphere') heats up, these molecules try as
>> hard as they can to shed that heat back into space."
>> 
>> For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere
>> absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO,
>> the two most efficient _coolants_ in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95%
>> of that total back into space.
>> ==============================================================
>> 
>> <https://i0.wp.com/i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r565/Keyell/SpectralCoolingRates_zps27867ef4.png>
>> Notice how CO2 has a cooling effect right from the lower stratosphere
>> and up into the mesosphere, its peak cooling effect around the
>> stratopause, while ozone has a clear warming effect in the lower
>> stratosphere (and even into the troposphere) but a cooling effect like
>> CO2 in the middle and upper stratosphere.
>> 
>> Cooling of Atmosphere Due to CO2 Emission Rudolf W. Gunnerman Energy and
>> Environment Laboratory; University of Southern California, Los Angeles,
>> California, USA; Institute of Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences,
>> Moscow, Russia
>> <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.306.3621&rep=rep1&type=pdf>
>> "The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the temperature
>> of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory of greenhouse
>> effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere results
>> in cooling rather than warming of the Earth's atmosphere."
>> 
>> And global cooling has been occurring...
>> 
>> <http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/06/26/study-that-warned-of-global-warming-over-past-decade-ridiculed-after-temperatures-drop/>
>> The UK Met trend shows an accelerating -0.014 C per decade *decrease*.
>> 
>> Message-ID: <e46a4017e5a77519d1489cd3f1129c08@dizum.com>
>> The actual underlying (read: unmanipulated) NOAA data shows a
>> 0.6186 F *decrease* from 2005 to 2015.
>> 
>> <http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI>
>> Dr. Don Easterbrook shows the past global warming was solar and
>> orbital forcing induced, the conditions have changed, and global
>> cooling has set in... since 1998.
>> 
>> <http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
>> Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
>> 
>> Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since ~1998.
>> *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been dropping for ~17
>> years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied to for ~17 years:
>> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
>> 
>> Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
>> Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in recent
>> years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack Machine
>> archived it):
>> <http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
>> Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic... *falling*
>> temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
>> 
>> "There has been no warming since '98, and a very slight cooling that is
>> not statistically significant." - Phil Jones, professor at the School of
>> Environmental Sciences at the scandal-rocked University of East Anglia.
>> 
>> <http://phys.org/news/2014-08-global-temperature-conundrum-cooling-climate.html>
>> "We have been building models and there are now robust contradictions,"
>> says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research.
>> "Data from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it
>> has to be warming."
>> 
>> ===============================================================
>> Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
>> <http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
>> 
>> "I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both global
>> warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real public relations
>> problem for us."  - Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
>> University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the bag.
>> 
>> You'll note he doesn't say "global cooling", he specifically says "an
>> ice age"... that's telling, don't you think? LOL
>> ===============================================================
>> 
>> SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping unemployable
>> welfare-mooching shroomtard, who can't refute the reality I promulgate.
>> 
>> <snicker>

> http://www.skepticalscience.com/Stratospheric-Cooling-and-Tropospheric-
> Warming.html
> 
> Kook.

Thank you for proving me right, you moron. LOL

What's that got to do with the fact that NASA, UAH, RSS, NSIDC and UK
Met all show sea water temperature and land surface temperatures have
been trending down, Paul?

SPNAK! on Paul G. Derbyshire the dress-wearing goat-raping
unemployable welfare-mooching shroomtard, who can't refute the reality
I promulgate.

<snicker>

Did... did Paul G. Derbyshire the goat-raping shroomtard
get outed *again*? Didn't you k'lame you were in Europe, Paul? LOL

Date: 03 May 2016
MID: <ng9mdq$m43$33@dont-email.me>
MD5: 28e199bc366b04f624161a7e7c6d9ee6
IP: 67.70.57.221
Location: Deep River, ON, Canada

Date: 10 Jun 2016
MID: <njf6m0$9i5$13@dont-email.me>
MD5: 5a7d8d855af84388d01b7dc826ef09d4
IP: 67.70.57.173
Location: Deep River, ON, Canada

Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul G.
Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada by Ray Banana. When Kensi D.
LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and
k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke.
LOL!

Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ>

From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>
Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at
this Usenet thing?
Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="67.70.58.178"; logging-data="29843";
Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock
puppets
Keywords: Murphy
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
========================================================
========================================================

Adding the Injection-Info: header into an E-S post gets it rejected.
Go on, Derbyshire, do it again, if you claim to be able to do it at
will.

Make it exactly this:
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1.1.1.1";
logging-data="29843";

Well, Paul? We're waiting. <tap, tap, tap> Nothing, Paul?

<snicker>

Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800>

Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by
coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda,
apparently.

And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team
on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole.

Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke, Ontario, Canada is a life-long virgin,
you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a
Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's
hooker-pink lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle.
Ironically, he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in
the sack... an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so
deeply it pokes out of her mouth!

Oh, here's Kensi:
<http://goo.gl/hdpXFC>

She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy?
I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice.

Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right
thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too.

<https://goo.gl/sbdRcq>

You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to
say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls
"sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go
kinky. LOL

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ>

> P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited 
> any good telescopes lately?

Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control
capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right?

<snicker>
========================================================
========================================================

Everyone is laughing at you, Paul Derbyshire. Everyone.

Spankard. ShroomTard. Failure.

<snicker>

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/carleton.chat.suggestions/XxE2PVnleGs>
Subject: The Derbyshire Saga
================================================================
[ Posted on Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:39:04 GMT ]

Ok, kids... here's the voice from the cheap seats, on the Derbyshire
Saga (tm).

Now, having read about young Paul (the short, whiny, irritating,
psychotic child that he is) having been dragged from a lab by "the
man", I can only assume that this little story occurred a) yesterday,
and b) in the Steacie building.

The coincidence of two such occurrences cropping up in the same day
"here in the trailer park" would be just too far out to contemplate.

It would seem, then, that young Paul Derbyshire is taking first year
chemistry. As an aside, I'll note that this isn't his first little
"fling" with the department. Shortly before Christmas, the undergrads
had their lab techniques exam. Paul, to whom we can add "clumsy" as
one of his many ignoble traits, couldn't perform under pressure
(begging the question...). Long story short:  He flipped... lost it
completely. Started swearing first at the proctors, then at the lab
supervisor, and lastly, after having been ejected from the lab, lashed
out at the department Chair. (Oh, yes, cursing, swearing, threatening,
the whole nine yards.)

Btw, this goes partly to the issue of "why didn't the TA in question
squash Mr. Derbyshire like a bug?". Since the repercussions could've
been significant.

In any event:  Yesterday, Paul spilled something in the lab. He
refused to clean it up. (I believe his exact words were "I am not a
human mop.". He kept asking other students to clean up his mess, and
became obstinate when pushed to take care of it himself. When he
started screaming and ranting, the lab supervisor called security on
him.

The fellow who responded is a human mountain named Al. Really nice
guy. Anyway, Paul was standing at the sink with a corrosive solution
in a flask, and refused to leave. "I'm busy, can you come back when
I'm not so busy" is the purported comment he made. Al refused to
apprehend him until the chemicals were secured, so, with security and
the lab supervisor watching, Paul returned to his bench, and continued
his experiment. This involved clamping the offending flask, at which
time Al moved in for the kill (so to speak).

Paul struggled, and managed to punch Al in the face (knocking off his
hat!). Al became... vexed, shall we say, and grabbed Paul by the neck
in a sort of headlock. (If you can imagine tiny Paul hanging, feet
kicking, whilst Al lifts him from behind with one arm around the neck
you have the proper picture.) Al then removed him from the lab, put
him on the ground, and proceeded to cuff him.

(Paul:  "what are you doing!?")

Al calls for backup at some point.

Al: "540, this is 8, I need backup for a..." etc.

Paul:  "Talking in police code doesn't make you any better than me."

Note:  All Paul comments were in a Sam Kinison-like screech at this
point.

Campus security backup arrives, as to the "real cops". They mention to
Paul that he's going "downtown" where he will be their guest for "a
long time". As he is being dragged out of the building, Paul is
screaming "What do you mean 'a long time'? I have things to do
tonight!"

Well... sorry if my prose isn't the greatest.  The story is much
better with voice-over, and particularly when you know all the people
involved. (except Paul, of course). I heard it first hand from a guy
in my lab who witnessed the whole event, btw. He does great Sam
Kinison impersonations.

I hear Paul is now the proud owner of a "No Trespass" restraining
order to keep him from the premises of Carleton University.

Semper Inquirens  (thx, Corey)
================================================================

Brian Publicover wrote:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/carleton.chat.suggestions/XxE2PVnleGs/lS73j-DcD04J>
================================================================
I remember in grade 8 Paul once threw a chair at my head because I
suggested that he liked girls (he used to hate females when he was
younger). This was not an isolated incident: I've seen him attack many
people. I don't think he's dangerous (unless he is holding corrosive
chemicals), but I'd hardly call these incidents "bizarre quirks."
================================================================

Awww, poor bootfucked little kooktard Paul G. Derbyshire of Pembroke,
Ontario, Canada has to relive his horrible past all over again... on
top of having his stoooopid ass drop-kicked across Usenet each and
every day. LOL

And now he's been outed as a dude who likes wearing dresses. And 
raping goats. LOL!

-- 

Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================

Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) said the Gaussian curvature =
1 / r^2 *and* the Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.

Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176

Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) says every sphere in the
entire universe has a radius of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a
moron, kensi didn't specify the units.

The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.

Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.

You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================

But Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) persists in insisting
that what he wrote isn't fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of
a sphere *does* depend upon its radius, because he doesn't understand
the equations he's trying to use, he doesn't know the difference
between 'constant curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know
what an integral is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even
basic geometry problems.

Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".

In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.

He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*. It also means LunkHead believes
the universe to be finite, and therefore it cannot be expanding.

Lunkhead the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) has k'lamed that magnetism
has "*no* effect" upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then
backpedaled and said there was a "small amount of positive curvature
due to the energy density in the field", thereby proving he doesn't
know how magnetism affects the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and
denies the existence of magnetic attraction.

Thus, Kensi the moron (aka Paul G. Derbyshire) has described a
universe in which planets could not maintain their orbits, a universe
in which magnets could not work, and therefore a universe which could
not exist.

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.

Kensi attempted to back up his kooky k'lame above by further k'laming
that snow emits at wavelengths which correspond to a variety of
temperatures, presumably from 489 F to -422 F, because the moron
doesn't understand that the Planck curve breaks down under certain
circumstances, meaning snow emits in accordance with the Wien
Displacement Law in a ~2.1251 micron window centered on the ~11-micron
infrared atmospheric window, not Planck's curve.

Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.

Kensi is the same moron who k'lamed heat flows from cooler to warmer;
that in a solid, molecules are "flying-and-bouncing-around-the-place",
that heat is "stirring up the molecules" and putting the molecules on
a "somewhat different trajectory", thereby demonstrating that LunkHead
cannot even grasp such basic topics as what heat is.

Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.

The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.

Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.

Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.

That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality. Kensi the moron is Paul
G. Derbyshire.

<snicker>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#585918

Shortly after one last night, spaketh Kooky:

> On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 20:47:03 +0000, Nadegda wrote:
>
>> At a quarter to one in the morning, the pressure in the Kookoogalla
>> Aquifer could not longer be contained, and the crimped frothnozzle
>> burst open:
>>
>>> "The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the
>>> temperature of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory
>>> of greenhouse effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the
>>> atmosphere results in cooling rather than warming of the Earth's
>>> atmosphere."
>>
>> http://www.skepticalscience.com/Stratospheric-Cooling-and-Tropospheric-
>> Warming.html
>> 
>> Kook.
> 
> Thank you for proving me right, you moron. LOL
> 
> What's that got to do with the fact that NASA, UAH, RSS, NSIDC and UK
> Met all s<MACKAKOOK!>

It disproves the k'lame you keep making that CO2 causes cooling, Kooky.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web