Damned little heretical machines...
 

just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.

Damned little heretical machines...
 

Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.


Luddite, eh?

Damned little heretical machines...
 

On Tue, 19 May 2009 07:00:08 -0400, Zombie of Woodstock wrote:

just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their
human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters' hypotheses, must
be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.

"Some scientists?" Geeze, you think he could have named at least one.

Besides temperatures, those buoys are redefining what we know about
currents. It had been thought that as the Gulf Stream moved water north
on the surface, the Labrador current, flowing deeper, was moving water
south to replace it. Apparently, those buoys show the current doesn't go
where it was expected. It either travels deeper than the buoys, or the
current dissipates somewhere south of the Flemish Cap.

Interesting science, beats the hell out of the Nike container.

http://oceanmotion.org/html/gatheringdata/flotsam.htm

Damned little heretical machines...
 

Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.

"less rapid warming"

Damned little heretical machines...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.


Luddite, eh?

Can't attack the data, so attack the messenger, huh Hairy?

Damned little heretical machines...
 

On Tue, 19 May 2009 07:08:42 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 19 May 2009 07:00:08 -0400, Zombie of Woodstock wrote:

just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their
human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters' hypotheses, must
be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.

"Some scientists?" Geeze, you think he could have named at least one.

Besides temperatures, those buoys are redefining what we know about
currents. It had been thought that as the Gulf Stream moved water north
on the surface, the Labrador current, flowing deeper, was moving water
south to replace it. Apparently, those buoys show the current doesn't go
where it was expected. It either travels deeper than the buoys, or the
current dissipates somewhere south of the Flemish Cap.

Interesting science, beats the hell out of the Nike container.

http://oceanmotion.org/html/gatheringdata/flotsam.htm

Cool stuff.

Tuna and cod fisherman have known that stuff about the Gulf Stream and
Labrador Current for years - they just kept it to themselves. :)

It is very interesting science - unfortunately, it's being politicized
just like everything else.

Damned little heretical machines...
 

On Tue, 19 May 2009 08:14:25 -0400, BAR wrote:

Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.

"less rapid warming"

Same diff. :)

Damned little heretical machines...
 

Lu Powell wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.


Luddite, eh?

Can't attack the data, so attack the messenger, huh Hairy?



Might and maybe do not equal "is," **** for brains.

Damned little heretical machines...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
Lu Powell wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Zombie of Woodstock wrote:
just aren't lying like humans want them to:

http://tinyurl.com/o7nmvt

"So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys'
findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to
detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific
orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm
dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of
their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters'
hypotheses, must be wrong."

Read a little further - the "cooling effect" is actually a sign of
"global warming".

Typical.


Luddite, eh?

Can't attack the data, so attack the messenger, huh Hairy?



Might and maybe do not equal "is," **** for brains.

I rest my case, oh unworthy master....