|
global warming
I got this feeling with all this yap about global warming , the weather-aka
seas will become very unstable. I keep watching and hearing about large chunks of ice falling out of the sky. we had one fall here in Tampa you may have seen it on the news. It smashed a car. The piece of ice was over 100lbs. The local news station confirmed that no planes were flying over that location at the time of the ice drop. What was funny the weather man could not explain the ice drop of that size. -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming
"sailirc" wrote I got this feeling with all this yap about global warming , the weather-aka seas will become very unstable. I keep watching and hearing about large chunks of ice falling out of the sky. we had one fall here in Tampa you may have seen it on the news. It smashed a car. The piece of ice was over 100lbs. The local news station confirmed that no planes were flying over that location at the time of the ice drop. What was funny the weather man could not explain the ice drop of that size. lol That piece of ice just keeps growing. They first said it weighed 80 pounds but they had a picture of it laying on the hood of the car it hit. You can see it was like a 20lb block. You can buy them most anywhere. Duh! Somebody threw it off the top of a building. Do you listen to Art Bell at night, Nora? Do do do do, do do do do, do do do do.... Cheers, Ellen |
global warming
"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote I got this feeling with all this yap about global warming , the weather-aka seas will become very unstable. I keep watching and hearing about large chunks of ice falling out of the sky. we had one fall here in Tampa you may have seen it on the news. It smashed a car. The piece of ice was over 100lbs. The local news station confirmed that no planes were flying over that location at the time of the ice drop. What was funny the weather man could not explain the ice drop of that size. lol That piece of ice just keeps growing. They first said it weighed 80 pounds but they had a picture of it laying on the hood of the car it hit. You can see it was like a 20lb block. You can buy them most anywhere. Duh! Somebody threw it off the top of a building. Do you listen to Art Bell at night, Nora? Do do do do, do do do do, do do do do.... Cheers, Ellen nope , the news cast said 100 lb |
global warming
"sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen |
global warming
"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming
"sailirc" wrote in message
news:2ecwh.8907$gn1.5883@trnddc06... "Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net Nora, Welcome back! Actually, Ellen is Neal Warren in a poor disguise... pretending to be a woman. Sad and pathetic more than being an asshole. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
global warming
"sailirc" wrote your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? I know what I read and I know what I see in a picture. Your tying a hoax to global warming is stupid. And since this is a sailing newsgroup what's people throwing chunks of ice outta buildings have to do with sailing. Cheers, Ellen |
global warming
"Capt. JG" wrote in message ... "sailirc" wrote in message news:2ecwh.8907$gn1.5883@trnddc06... "Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net Nora, Welcome back! Actually, Ellen is Neal Warren in a poor disguise... pretending to be a woman. Sad and pathetic more than being an asshole. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com Hi J! yes I kind of figured it was someone wacked NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming
sailirc wrote:
"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net Nora, It's Neal Warren wearing a dress... |
global warming
"katy" wrote in message ... sailirc wrote: "Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net Nora, It's Neal Warren wearing a dress... Hi Katy omg Neil in a dress lol hes becoming a real rug muncher NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming
"katy" wrote in message
... sailirc wrote: "Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.net... "sailirc" wrote nope , the news cast said 100 lb Nora-on-the-spot. :-) I read it from the newspaper report on Drudge Report. I'll look maybe it's still up there. It said 80 pounds buy anybody could see from the picture that it was way exaggerated. Cheers, Ellen your missing the point. The topic was global warming not a debate on how large the ice was. your one of those know it all asshles arent you? NH-/)_ www.sailirc.net Nora, It's Neal Warren wearing a dress... Eww... An image that will not soon be deleted from my memory..... thanks for nothing! -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
global warming
"katy" wrote Nora, It's Neal Warren wearing a dress... Do do do do, do do do do, do do do do, do do do do....... Cheers, Ellen |
global warming
"Capt. JG" wrote Actually, Ellen is Neal Warren in a poor disguise... pretending to be a woman. Sad and pathetic more than being an asshole. How can you be so sure, Capt. JG? With that super strong dose of LSD you bragged about snorting your brain probably not working right. Don't you remember posting these posts? http://tinyurl.com/ya93xt http://tinyurl.com/yex65q Cheers, Ellen |
global warming
Isn't about time you post a new pic?
Scotty "Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message reenews.ne t... "katy" wrote Nora, It's Neal Warren wearing a dress... Do do do do, do do do do, do do do do, do do do do....... Cheers, Ellen |
global warming liars
On Jan 31, 8:05 pm, "sailirc" wrote:
I got this feeling with all this yap about global warming , the weather-aka seas will become very unstable. I keep watching and hearing about large chunks of ice falling out of the sky. we had one fall here in Tampa you may have seen it on the news. It smashed a car. The piece of ice was over 100lbs. The local news station confirmed that no planes were flying over that location at the time of the ice drop. What was funny the weather man could not explain the ice drop of that size. -- NH_/)_www.sailirc.net The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're a respected scientist, one of the best in your field. So respected, in fact, that when the United Nations decided to study the relationship between hurricanes and global warming for the largest scientific endeavour in its history -- its International Panel on Climate Change -- it called upon you and your expertise. You are Christopher Landsea of the Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory. You were a contributing author for the UN's second International Panel on Climate Change in 1995, writing the sections on observed changes in tropical cyclones around the world. Then the IPCC called on you as a contributing author once more, for its "Third Assessment Report" in 2001. And you were invited to participate yet again, when the IPCC called on you to be an author in the "Fourth Assessment Report." This report would specifically focus on Atlantic hurricanes, your specialty, and be published by the IPCC in 2007. Then something went horribly wrong. Within days of this last invitation, in October, 2004, you discovered that the IPCC's Kevin Trenberth -- the very person who had invited you -- was participating in a press conference. The title of the press conference perplexed you: "Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity." This was some kind of mistake, you were certain. You had not done any work that substantiated this claim. Nobody had. As perplexing, none of the participants in that press conference were known for their hurricane expertise. In fact, to your knowledge, none had performed any research at all on hurricane variability, the subject of the press conference. Neither were they reporting on any new work in the field. All previous and current research in the area of hurricane variability, you knew, showed no reliable upward trend in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes. Not in the Atlantic basin. Not in any other basin. To add to the utter incomprehensibility of the press conference, the IPCC itself, in both 1995 and 2001, had found no global warming signal in the hurricane record. And until your new work would come out, in 2007, the IPCC would not have a new analysis on which to base a change of findings. To stop the press conference, or at least stop any misunderstandings that might come out of it, you contacted Dr. Trenberth prior to the media event. You prepared a synopsis for him that brought him up to date on the state of knowledge about hurricane formation. To your amazement, he simply dismissed your concerns. The press conference proceeded. And what a press conference it was! Hurricanes had been all over the news that summer. Global warming was the obvious culprit -- only a fool or an oil-industry lobbyist, the press made clear, could ignore the link between what seemed to be ever increasing hurricane activity and ever increasing global warming. The press conference didn't disappoint them. The climate change experts at hand all confirmed the news that the public had been primed to hear: Global warming was causing hurricanes. This judgement from the scientists made headlines around the world, just as it was intended to do. What better way to cast global warming as catastrophic than to make hurricanes its poster child? You wanted to right this outrageous wrong, this mockery that was made of your scientific field. You wrote top IPCC officials, imploring: "Where is the science, the refereed publications, that substantiate these pronouncements? What studies are being alluded to that have shown a connection between observed warming trends on the earth and long-term trends in tropical cyclone activity? As far as I know, there are none." But no one in the IPCC leadership showed the slightest concern for the science. The IPCC's overriding preoccupation, it soon sunk in, lay in capitalizing on the publicity opportunity that the hurricane season presented. You then asked the IPCC leadership for assurances that your work for the IPCC's 2007 report would be true to science: "[Dr. Trenberth] seems to have already come to the conclusion that global warming has altered hurricane activity and has publicly stated so. This does not reflect the consensus within the hurricane research community. ... Thus I would like assurance that what will be included in the IPCC report will reflect the best available information and the consensus within the scientific community most expert on the specific topic." The assurance didn't come. What did come was the realization that the IPCC was corrupting science. This you could not be a party to. You then resigned, in an open letter to the scientific community laying out your reasons. Next year, the IPCC will come out with its "Fourth Assessment Report," and for the first time in a decade, you will not be writing its section on hurricanes. That task will be left to the successor that Dr. Trenberth chose. As part of his responsibility, he will need to explain why -- despite all expectations -- the 2006 hurricane year was so unexpectedly light, and at the historical average for the past 150 years. - Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation. THE CV OF A DENIER: Christopher Landsea received his doctoral degree in atmospheric science from Colorado State University. A research meteorologist at the Atlantic Oceanic and Meteorological Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, he was chair of the American Meteorological Society's committee on tropical meteorology and tropical cyclones and a recipient of the American Meteorological Society's Banner I. Miller Award for the "best contribution to the science of hurricane and tropical weather forecasting." He is a frequent contributor to leading journals, including Science, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Journal of Climate, and Nature. |
global warming liars
"Joe" wrote in message oups.com... On Jan 31, 8:05 pm, "sailirc" wrote: I got this feeling with all this yap about global warming , the weather-aka seas will become very unstable. I keep watching and hearing about large chunks of ice falling out of the sky. we had one fall here in Tampa you may have seen it on the news. It smashed a car. The piece of ice was over 100lbs. The local news station confirmed that no planes were flying over that location at the time of the ice drop. What was funny the weather man could not explain the ice drop of that size. -- NH_/)_www.sailirc.net The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're a respected scientist, one of the best in your field. So respected, in fact, that when the United Nations decided to study the relationship between hurricanes and global warming for the largest scientific endeavour in its history -- its International Panel on Climate Change -- it called upon you and your expertise. You are Christopher Landsea of the Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory. You were a contributing author for the UN's second International Panel on Climate Change in 1995, writing the sections on observed changes in tropical cyclones around the world. Then the IPCC called on you as a contributing author once more, for its "Third Assessment Report" in 2001. And you were invited to participate yet again, when the IPCC called on you to be an author in the "Fourth Assessment Report." This report would specifically focus on Atlantic hurricanes, your specialty, and be published by the IPCC in 2007. Then something went horribly wrong. Within days of this last invitation, in October, 2004, you discovered that the IPCC's Kevin Trenberth -- the very person who had invited you -- was participating in a press conference. The title of the press conference perplexed you: "Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity." This was some kind of mistake, you were certain. You had not done any work that substantiated this claim. Nobody had. As perplexing, none of the participants in that press conference were known for their hurricane expertise. In fact, to your knowledge, none had performed any research at all on hurricane variability, the subject of the press conference. Neither were they reporting on any new work in the field. All previous and current research in the area of hurricane variability, you knew, showed no reliable upward trend in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes. Not in the Atlantic basin. Not in any other basin. To add to the utter incomprehensibility of the press conference, the IPCC itself, in both 1995 and 2001, had found no global warming signal in the hurricane record. And until your new work would come out, in 2007, the IPCC would not have a new analysis on which to base a change of findings. To stop the press conference, or at least stop any misunderstandings that might come out of it, you contacted Dr. Trenberth prior to the media event. You prepared a synopsis for him that brought him up to date on the state of knowledge about hurricane formation. To your amazement, he simply dismissed your concerns. The press conference proceeded. And what a press conference it was! Hurricanes had been all over the news that summer. Global warming was the obvious culprit -- only a fool or an oil-industry lobbyist, the press made clear, could ignore the link between what seemed to be ever increasing hurricane activity and ever increasing global warming. The press conference didn't disappoint them. The climate change experts at hand all confirmed the news that the public had been primed to hear: Global warming was causing hurricanes. This judgement from the scientists made headlines around the world, just as it was intended to do. What better way to cast global warming as catastrophic than to make hurricanes its poster child? You wanted to right this outrageous wrong, this mockery that was made of your scientific field. You wrote top IPCC officials, imploring: "Where is the science, the refereed publications, that substantiate these pronouncements? What studies are being alluded to that have shown a connection between observed warming trends on the earth and long-term trends in tropical cyclone activity? As far as I know, there are none." But no one in the IPCC leadership showed the slightest concern for the science. The IPCC's overriding preoccupation, it soon sunk in, lay in capitalizing on the publicity opportunity that the hurricane season presented. You then asked the IPCC leadership for assurances that your work for the IPCC's 2007 report would be true to science: "[Dr. Trenberth] seems to have already come to the conclusion that global warming has altered hurricane activity and has publicly stated so. This does not reflect the consensus within the hurricane research community. ... Thus I would like assurance that what will be included in the IPCC report will reflect the best available information and the consensus within the scientific community most expert on the specific topic." The assurance didn't come. What did come was the realization that the IPCC was corrupting science. This you could not be a party to. You then resigned, in an open letter to the scientific community laying out your reasons. Next year, the IPCC will come out with its "Fourth Assessment Report," and for the first time in a decade, you will not be writing its section on hurricanes. That task will be left to the successor that Dr. Trenberth chose. As part of his responsibility, he will need to explain why -- despite all expectations -- the 2006 hurricane year was so unexpectedly light, and at the historical average for the past 150 years. - Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation. THE CV OF A DENIER: Christopher Landsea received his doctoral degree in atmospheric science from Colorado State University. A research meteorologist at the Atlantic Oceanic and Meteorological Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, he was chair of the American Meteorological Society's committee on tropical meteorology and tropical cyclones and a recipient of the American Meteorological Society's Banner I. Miller Award for the "best contribution to the science of hurricane and tropical weather forecasting." He is a frequent contributor to leading journals, including Science, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Journal of Climate, and Nature. good post -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming liars
"Joe" wrote You're a respected scientist, one of the best in your field. So respected, in fact, that when the United Nations decided to study the relationship between hurricanes and global warming for the largest scientific endeavour in its history -- its International Panel on Climate Change -- it called upon you and your expertise. a largish snip The trouble with global warming is nobody knows. And if somebody knew, there's nothing they could do about it anyway. It's just a way to sell books, magazines, movies, and television shows. There's so many really really dumb people around like Nora who actually believe it when people say you global warming's responsible for making big blocks of ice falling outta the sky. When so many people are so dumb they can't figure out how stupid it is to say global warming's making ice fall outta the sky then it's pretty pitiful. Mind-numbed robots..... Cheers, Ellen |
global warming liars
Joe wrote:
The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're quoting from a Canadian organization (Energy Probe Research Foundation)? One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? Cheers Marty |
global warming liars
Here is another link on the subject.
http://www.msnbc.com/id/1692224/ they claim ocean levels will rise in the next century -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming liars
Martin Baxter wrote:
Joe wrote: crap snipped One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? The third option of course: deny that it's happening at all. Head, meet sand. //Walt |
global warming liars
On Feb 2, 11:34 am, Martin Baxter wrote:
Joe wrote: The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're quoting from a Canadian organization (Energy Probe Research Foundation)? One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? Cheers Marty I'm just tryiong to figure how to make more money off your fears. like all the other global warming warriors. You know more about hurricanes then the most honored hurricane researcher in the Atlantic basin? Joe joe |
global warming liars
On Feb 2, 12:00 pm, Walt wrote:
Martin Baxter wrote: Joe wrote: crap snipped One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? The third option of course: deny that it's happening at all. Head, meet sand. //Walt Another option might be to figure out if it's caused by nature or man. Joe |
global warming liars
I've parked my truck under a big tree, just in case.
Scotty "sailirc" wrote in message news:1LKwh.4579$WI6.3947@trnddc04... Here is another link on the subject. http://www.msnbc.com/id/1692224/ they claim ocean levels will rise in the next century -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming liars
Joe wrote:
On Feb 2, 11:34 am, Martin Baxter wrote: Joe wrote: The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're quoting from a Canadian organization (Energy Probe Research Foundation)? One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? Cheers Marty I'm just tryiong to figure how to make more money off your fears. like all the other global warming warriors. You know more about hurricanes then the most honored hurricane researcher in the Atlantic basin? So, are you claiming that Dr. Landsea is denying global warming? |
global warming liars
On Feb 2, 1:31 pm, Jeff wrote:
Joe wrote: On Feb 2, 11:34 am, Martin Baxter wrote: Joe wrote: The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're quoting from a Canadian organization (Energy Probe Research Foundation)? One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? Cheers Marty I'm just tryiong to figure how to make more money off your fears. like all the other global warming warriors. You know more about hurricanes then the most honored hurricane researcher in the Atlantic basin? So, are you claiming that Dr. Landsea is denying global warming?- No..I just posted his opinion that the global warming folks are using hurricanes as the "global warming poster child." It's a scare tactic, and the Hurricane expert says they are bald face liar's. You should read the posting again. I trust Dr. Landsea's opinion on Hurricanes more than some Yourapeein pack of liars. Joe Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
global warming liars
Joe wrote:
I'm just tryiong to figure how to make more money off your fears. like all the other global warming warriors. You know more about hurricanes then the most honored hurricane researcher in the Atlantic basin? So, are you claiming that Dr. Landsea is denying global warming?- No..I just posted his opinion that the global warming folks are using hurricanes as the "global warming poster child." It's a scare tactic, and the Hurricane expert says they are bald face liar's. You should read the posting again. I trust Dr. Landsea's opinion on Hurricanes more than some Yourapeein pack of liars. Dr. Landsea agrees that Global Warming is with us for the long haul. His point has been that it is (or was, several years ago) premature to blame increased hurricanes on global warming. His conclusion is three-fold, that the science is only "suggestive" of a linkage, but not definitive. Second, that the change in hurricane intensity will be relatively small. And third, that the increased "dollar value" of the hurricane damage is caused more by increased wealth and coastal development than increased storm strength. From his 2004 paper: CONCLUSIONS. To summarize, claims of linkages between global warming and hurricane impacts are premature for three reasons. First, no connection has been established between greenhouse gas emissions and the observed behavior of hurricanes (Houghton et al. 2001; Walsh 2004). Emanuel (2005) is suggestive of such a connection, but is by no means definitive. In the future, such a connection may be established [e.g., in the case of the observations of Emanuel (2005) or the projections of Knutson and Tuleya (2004)] or made in the context of other metrics of tropical cyclone intensity and duration that remain to be closely examined. Second, the peer-reviewed literature reflects that a scientific consensus exists that any future changes in hurricane intensities will likely be small in the context of observed variability (Knutson and Tuleya 2004; Henderson-Sellers et al. 1998), while the scientific problem of tropical cyclogenesis is so far from being solved that little can be said about possible changes in frequency. And third, under the assumptions of the IPCC, expected future damages to society of its projected changes in the behavior of hurricanes are dwarfed by the influence of its own projections of growing wealth and population (Pielke et al. 2000). While future research or experience may yet overturn these conclusions, the state of the peer-reviewed knowledge today is such that there are good reasons to expect that any conclusive connection between global warming and hurricanes or their impacts will not be made in the near term. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea...etalBAMS05.pdf |
global warming liars
CONCLUSIONS. To summarize, claims of linkages between global warming and hurricane impacts are premature for three reasons. First, no connection has been established between greenhouse gas emissions and the observed behavior of hurricanes (Houghton et al. 2001; Walsh 2004). Emanuel (2005) is suggestive of such a connection, but is by no means definitive. In the future, such a connection may be established [e.g., in the case of the observations of Emanuel (2005) or the projections of Knutson and Tuleya (2004)] or made in the context of other metrics of tropical cyclone intensity and duration that remain to be closely examined. Second, the peer-reviewed literature reflects that a scientific consensus exists that any future changes in hurricane intensities will likely be small in the context of observed variability (Knutson and Tuleya 2004; Henderson-Sellers et al. 1998), while the scientific problem of tropical cyclogenesis is so far from being solved that little can be said about possible changes in frequency. And third, under the assumptions of the IPCC, expected future damages to society of its projected changes in the behavior of hurricanes are dwarfed by the influence of its own projections of growing wealth and population (Pielke et al. 2000). While future research or experience may yet overturn these conclusions, the state of the peer-reviewed knowledge today is such that there are good reasons to expect that any conclusive connection between global warming and hurricanes or their impacts will not be made in the near term. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea...etalBAMS05.pdf If what they claim? or start to let loose to the public is true you will see a lot of strange happenings with the weather. I don't know how it will effect ocean currents and calm sailing seasons. FL just got hit again with deadly tornadoes last night and we are expecting more tonight. I lucked out and it hit north of us. The tornadoes that hit last night are uncommon to our state we normally get hit with F1 but we got hit with EF3 ,winds over 150mph. Bush is pushing to stop using fossil fuels but I don't think big business aka oil companies and automotive will jump to build cars that address fossil fuel issues fast enough. a few electric cars are on the roads now but they only have a short battery life. -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net |
global warming liars
|
global warming liars
"sailirc" wrote in message
news:xmQwh.149$MH2.83@trnddc03... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COyb9FcpggU -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net The problem is really much greater variability in weather, not just warmer weather or a few more inches of rain. Of course, there are always people who deny the truth even when it's looking them in the face. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
global warming liars
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:48:27 -0800, "Capt. JG"
wrote: "sailirc" wrote in message news:xmQwh.149$MH2.83@trnddc03... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COyb9FcpggU -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net The problem is really much greater variability in weather, not just warmer weather or a few more inches of rain. No the problem is YOU talking out of your ass and changing the weather of this group. Of course, there are always people who deny the truth even when it's looking them in the face. Great self-recognition skills you have Jonathan. Told many good lies to innocent folk's ISP's lately? |
global warming liars
"Captain Hook" wrote in message ... On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:48:27 -0800, "Capt. JG" wrote: "sailirc" wrote in message news:xmQwh.149$MH2.83@trnddc03... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COyb9FcpggU -- NH_/)_ www.sailirc.net The problem is really much greater variability in weather, not just warmer weather or a few more inches of rain. No the problem is YOU talking out of your ass and changing the weather of this group. Of course, there are always people who deny the truth even when it's looking them in the face. Great self-recognition skills you have Jonathan. Told many good lies to innocent folk's ISP's lately? You expect truth from a left-winger? JB |
global warming liars
On 2 Feb 2007 12:29:19 -0800, "Joe" wrote:
On Feb 2, 1:31 pm, Jeff wrote: Joe wrote: On Feb 2, 11:34 am, Martin Baxter wrote: Joe wrote: The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science The Deniers -- Part III Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 02, 2007 December 8, 2006 You're quoting from a Canadian organization (Energy Probe Research Foundation)? One or two "scientists" say that Global warming is entirely attributable too natural causes, 5000 others say man is making a significant contribution, and which do you go with? Cheers Marty I'm just tryiong to figure how to make more money off your fears. like all the other global warming warriors. You know more about hurricanes then the most honored hurricane researcher in the Atlantic basin? So, are you claiming that Dr. Landsea is denying global warming?- No..I just posted his opinion that the global warming folks are using hurricanes as the "global warming poster child." It's a scare tactic, and the Hurricane expert says they are bald face liar's. You should read the posting again. I trust Dr. Landsea's opinion on Hurricanes more than some Yourapeein pack of liars. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten.../291/5504/566a News of the Week CLIMATE CHANGE: It's Official: Humans Are Behind Most of Global Warming Richard A. Kerr The United Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change officially declared early this week that "most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations." The panel was vaguer than ever, though, about how bad things could get by the end of the century. At a minimum, the world will warm more than twice as much in the coming century as it did in the past one, the panel concluded, but it could warm 10 times as much. Bet you nor the quack don't live in Florida! |
global warming liars
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:33:06 -0500, "Ellen MacArthur"
wrote: "Joe" wrote You're a respected scientist, one of the best in your field. So respected, in fact, that when the United Nations decided to study the relationship between hurricanes and global warming for the largest scientific endeavour in its history -- its International Panel on Climate Change -- it called upon you and your expertise. a largish snip The trouble with global warming is nobody knows. And if somebody knew, there's nothing they could do about it anyway. It's just a way to sell books, magazines, movies, and television shows. There's so many really really dumb people around like Nora who actually believe it when people say you global warming's responsible for making big blocks of ice falling outta the sky. When so many people are so dumb they can't figure out how stupid it is to say global warming's making ice fall outta the sky then it's pretty pitiful. Mind-numbed robots..... Katrina's real name http://www.boston.com/news/weather/a...l_name?mode=PF By Ross Gelbspan | August 30, 2005 THE HURRICANE that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name is global warming. When the year began with a two-foot snowfall in Los Angeles, the cause was global warming. When 124-mile-an-hour winds shut down nuclear plants in Scandinavia and cut power to hundreds of thousands of people in Ireland and the United Kingdom, the driver was global warming. When a severe drought in the Midwest dropped water levels in the Missouri River to their lowest on record earlier this summer, the reason was global warming. In July, when the worst drought on record triggered wildfires in Spain and Portugal and left water levels in France at their lowest in 30 years, the explanation was global warming. When a lethal heat wave in Arizona kept temperatures above 110 degrees and killed more than 20 people in one week, the culprit was global warming. And when the Indian city of Bombay (Mumbai) received 37 inches of rain in one day -- killing 1,000 people and disrupting the lives of 20 million others -- the villain was global warming. As the atmosphere warms, it generates longer droughts, more-intense downpours, more-frequent heat waves, and more-severe storms. Although Katrina began as a relatively small hurricane that glanced off south Florida, it was supercharged with extraordinary intensity by the relatively blistering sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico. The consequences are as heartbreaking as they are terrifying. Unfortunately, very few people in America know the real name of Hurricane Katrina because the coal and oil industries have spent millions of dollars to keep the public in doubt about the issue. The reason is simple: To allow the climate to stabilize requires humanity to cut its use of coal and oil by 70 percent. That, of course, threatens the survival of one of the largest commercial enterprises in history. In 1995, public utility hearings in Minnesota found that the coal industry had paid more than $1 million to four scientists who were public dissenters on global warming. And ExxonMobil has spent more than $13 million since 1998 on an anti-global warming public relations and lobbying campaign. In 2000, big oil and big coal scored their biggest electoral victory yet when President George W. Bush was elected president -- and subsequently took suggestions from the industry for his climate and energy policies. As the pace of climate change accelerates, many researchers fear we have already entered a period of irreversible runaway climate change. Against this background, the ignorance of the American public about global warming stands out as an indictment of the US media. When the US press has bothered to cover the subject of global warming, it has focused almost exclusively on its political and diplomatic aspects and not on what the warming is doing to our agriculture, water supplies, plant and animal life, public health, and weather. For years, the fossil fuel industry has lobbied the media to accord the same weight to a handful of global warming skeptics that it accords the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries reporting to the United Nations. Today, with the science having become even more robust -- and the impacts as visible as the megastorm that covered much of the Gulf of Mexico -- the press bears a share of the guilt for our self-induced destruction with the oil and coal industries. As a Bostonian, I am afraid that the coming winter will -- like last winter -- be unusually short and devastatingly severe. At the beginning of 2005, a deadly ice storm knocked out power to thousands of people in New England and dropped a record-setting 42.2 inches of snow on Boston. The conventional name of the month was January. Its real name is global warming. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com