Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 22:11:30 -0500, katy said:

What you don't understand is geoglofical and climatical history...100
years is a nothing..

Jon has hockey stick on the brain, Katy


Dave is full of... no, I'm not going to say it.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 19:17:13 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Unusual to make the same typo twice in one short paragraph.


Well, I'm an usual guy.

Some folks might have thought you didn't know the lady's name.


She's no lady. She's a viper.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 19:17:32 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

So Hillary didn't really tell that fairy tale about the immaculately
generated billing records showing up in the library?


Keep saying it Dave.. a couple of dozen more times should do it.

Then you'll be willing to answer the question?


Of course.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"scbafreak via BoatKB.com" u25927@uwe wrote in message
news:6d86598928fe8@uwe...
unforseen changes which could make the situation worse. Cleaning up
emissions is a laudable endeavor, if for no other reason than to clean up
the air we breathe.

Max

Yes but the apathetic American public always needs impending doom to make
any
changes in thier lives even if those changes will directly benefit
themselves.
I largely agree with you on the GW issue that we really don't know but
cleaning things up would be a good idea. Fossil fuel emmissions come with
a
lot of problems that we know exist and have proof of but may not cause us
to
all die. Still they are problems and should be addressed but people in
this
country just wont do anything but bitch until they think the world will
end.
If GW will make people decide producing less pollution is a good idea then
I
say so be it. Capt. JG might be a little overzealous but people making
noise
like he is clearly doing might inspire some other "genius" to make a
change
in their lives for the better even if for the wrong reasons.

Folks in general won't react to GW until we have something similar to that
portrayed in the movie "The Day After Tomorrow." Folks need a brick against
the head to wake up and see what's happening. The current scare tactics of
the GW set are accomplishing nothing apart from making a few left-wing
organizers quite wealthy.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message

Really... you listen to both sides. So, what does science, real science
from scientists, actually say about GW?

If you bothered to be circumspect, you'd realize that the
meteorological/geographical scientific community is almost evenly split
on the subject.

I contend that there are always a couple of wackos who are unconvinced
by the preponderance of evidence.

I see. When scientists disagree with your point of view, they are
wackos?

What do you believe in?

I've made that clear in any number of posts. But since you seem to read
selectively: I believe that the global warming we are currently
experiencing is, to some unknown degree, influenced by the activities of
mankind. I also believe that the warming trend is at least party natural
and predictable, and would have occurred during this same period even if
the Earth had no human population. The net effect of human activity upon
the warming of the planet is unknown, albeit real. Until we actually
know, any attempts to correct the perceived problem will likely have one
of two outcomes: 1) it will achieve nothing substantive, or 2) it will
cause unforseen changes which could make the situation worse. Cleaning
up emissions is a laudable endeavor, if for no other reason than to clean
up the air we breathe.

So far, I have yet to see you cite any actual facts on the subject.

I've cited at least as many facts as you have. You spout vitriol and
platitudes, but offer up no evidence. You automatically assume that
*everyone* already knows all about GW, or at least your version of it.
You have a closed mind.

Max



You're completely wrong about an even split. The vast majority of
scientists know that we're dramatically changing our environment for the
worse. Look it up for gods sake. You're really not putting your best foot
forward here.

I have looked it up. As an example, Purdue University's meteorology
department published a position paper a while back stating that man-made GW
is probably a fact, but inconsequential compared with the normal global
warming trend. Out of their entire faculty only one of their people
dissented in that paper. I attempted to find a link for it, but so far I've
been unsuccessful. Give it a try--you may have better luck.

The point is that you choose to believe that the majority of meteorological
researchers are on board with your belief, but that simply isn't supported
by fact. Feel free to prove me wrong with more than just your opinion.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:47:37 GMT, "Maxprop" wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 06:05:29 GMT, "Maxprop"
wrote:


"Dave" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 18:21:23 -0500, Charlie Morgan said:

Sorry, but it is you who is just plain wrong on this. I don't know
where
you
pasted that from, but it's not very well done.

"such as" is used when you want to refer to things that are similar to
the
object, without BEING the object.

Refer to the AP stylebook, or maybe Strunk & White, if you still don't
understand this important distinction.

You are not quite at the level of those who do not know the difference
between
effect and affect, but you are getting close. :')

I pulled that definition out of the first online dictionary I came to.

You like the AP Stylebook better? Here's an excerpt from an online
edition
of it:

"Use like as a preposition to compare nouns and pronouns. It requires
an
object: Jim blocks like a pro."

Your problem, Charlie, is that while you may have some book learnin',
you
have no ear whatever for the language in context. You have a tin ear
for
usage. "Like" was perfectly correct as Katy used it, and was perfectly
appropriate in the context in which she used it. "Such as" would have
been
awkward and stilted. It's the kind of phrase a literate writer might
use
in
a brief, but not in a news group.

. . . or in vis-a-vis conversation.

Don't be too hard on BB--he wasted all his money on Whitworth tools when
metric and SAE would have worked just fine.

Max


Max=hack. He may as well use vice-grips.

Only on *your* bikes.

Max


I use proper tools. You are the hack. Maybe your bikes aren't worth the
effort.


What bikes? I haven't owned any for several years. But my Gold Star race
bike was a gorgeous piece of history. If I still owned it, I'd beseech you
to find even one bolt with roundover marks on the head. Same with my 441
Victor.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:26:53 GMT, "Maxprop" wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 22:45:56 -0800, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Maxprop" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message

I wish it weren't, but I'm living in the real world.

The real world of make-believe science.

Max



Sure Max. Unlike your "real world" of religious belief and right-wing
certitude. I'm sure if you keep saying Bush is right over and over, it's
got
to be true.

Max doesn't even trust mathmatics. It's a gray area as far as he is
concerned.
Ask him about Whitworth hardware. He things it matches up exactly with
Metric
and SAE hardware. If that were so, there would be no such thing as a
separate
system named "Whitworth".

LOL. The only important aspect of Whitworth tools is the money a few
British companies made by selling them to people who were too myopic to
realize that a combination of metric and SAE tools fit every single
Whitworth fastener so closely as to obviate the need for Whitworths. If
that weren't true, I have destroyed the nuts and bolts on my Gold Star.
After 4 years of racing, I never had to replace a single fastener due to
head damage. And that included at least five complete teardowns.
How you spend you money is your business. Thankfully we had some savvy
Britbike techs around here who knew that Whitworth spanners and sockets
were
a waste of money.

Max


You reveal yourself and your incompetence quite clearly.

Incompetence?? Would you care to see a photo of a 10x12 bedroom filled with
wall-to-wall trophies from my racing days?

Hundreds of people used to race Brit bikes when I first got into flattrack
racing. And I never met one of them who owned a set of Whitworth tools.

You reveal yourself to be a pedantic ninny quite clearly.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message

You don't know the facts. The facts are that the rate of climate warming
has increased dramatically in the last 100 years or so, far more than can
be explained by the normal cycle of hot/cold.

What's "dramatically" Jon? Give us some numbers. Careful--I have the
facts, so don't make something up.

In addition, the increase in human population has prevented such things as
normal relocation of plants and animals through what would be normal
migration patterns. This is not a long term trend. This is a dramatic
increase in the RATE of change, not something that has been seen in the
previous millions of years.

There definitely are too many people on the globe, and wildlife (both
botanical and zoological) habitats are becoming eliminated and scarce in
many zones. But only computer models can predict the effect of such things,
and those models are often tainted by the agenda of those who design them.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 22:11:30 -0500, katy said:

What you don't understand is geoglofical and climatical history...100
years is a nothing..

Jon has hockey stick on the brain, Katy


Dave is full of... no, I'm not going to say it.

For a moment there I thought you were going to tell him to puck off.

Max

Who are you gonna listen to?
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:28:10 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

How was he an asshole? He was VP for crissake.

Ergo being an asshole and being VP are mutually exclusive?

That's what I was wondering.

Max