On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:06:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:38:07 -0400, JustWait penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|In article ,
|says...
|
| No where NEAR "half" of scientists that are studying global warming
| think
|
|Although I agree with the statement so far.... Anyway, there in lies the
|problem.. Most "scientists who are studying global taxing" are deeply
|vested in the economics of studying the issue. That is to say, if there
|is no Global Taxing, they are out of work... snerk...
|
| it has nothing to do with the greenhouse gases that man is spewing
| into the atmosphere. It's amazing that the GOP chooses to heed the words
| of a very few scientists that have a GOP agenda rather than listen to
| the WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.
|
|It's a shame the DNC chooses to heed the words of a very few "however
|vocal" scientists that have a "green" agenda rather than listen to the
|WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.

Your talking points are showing, but they are fairly devoid of facts.

Ninety-seven percent of the climate scientists surveyed believe
“global average temperatures have increased” during the past century.

Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming
is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific
evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that human
activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are
unsure.
http://stats.org/stories/2008/global..._apr23_08.html

The Freak doesn't require facts or overwhelming consensus.

He's got faith.

jps wrote:
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:06:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:38:07 -0400, JustWait penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|In article ,
|says...
|
| No where NEAR "half" of scientists that are studying global warming
| think
|
|Although I agree with the statement so far.... Anyway, there in lies the
|problem.. Most "scientists who are studying global taxing" are deeply
|vested in the economics of studying the issue. That is to say, if there
|is no Global Taxing, they are out of work... snerk...
|
| it has nothing to do with the greenhouse gases that man is spewing
| into the atmosphere. It's amazing that the GOP chooses to heed the words
| of a very few scientists that have a GOP agenda rather than listen to
| the WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.
|
|It's a shame the DNC chooses to heed the words of a very few "however
|vocal" scientists that have a "green" agenda rather than listen to the
|WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.

Your talking points are showing, but they are fairly devoid of facts.

Ninety-seven percent of the climate scientists surveyed believe
“global average temperatures have increased” during the past century.

Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming
is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific
evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that human
activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are
unsure.
http://stats.org/stories/2008/global..._apr23_08.html

The Freak doesn't require facts or overwhelming consensus.

He's got faith.


Sometimes I think SW Tom sends him stuff to post here, stuff so
*right-wingedly* stupid that Tom would be too embarrassed to post it
under his own handle.

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:42:39 -0400, H the K
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:06:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:38:07 -0400, JustWait penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|In article ,
|says...
|
| No where NEAR "half" of scientists that are studying global warming
| think
|
|Although I agree with the statement so far.... Anyway, there in lies the
|problem.. Most "scientists who are studying global taxing" are deeply
|vested in the economics of studying the issue. That is to say, if there
|is no Global Taxing, they are out of work... snerk...
|
| it has nothing to do with the greenhouse gases that man is spewing
| into the atmosphere. It's amazing that the GOP chooses to heed the words
| of a very few scientists that have a GOP agenda rather than listen to
| the WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.
|
|It's a shame the DNC chooses to heed the words of a very few "however
|vocal" scientists that have a "green" agenda rather than listen to the
|WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.

Your talking points are showing, but they are fairly devoid of facts.

Ninety-seven percent of the climate scientists surveyed believe
“global average temperatures have increased” during the past century.

Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming
is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific
evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that human
activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are
unsure.
http://stats.org/stories/2008/global..._apr23_08.html

The Freak doesn't require facts or overwhelming consensus.

He's got faith.


Sometimes I think SW Tom sends him stuff to post here, stuff so
*right-wingedly* stupid that Tom would be too embarrassed to post it
under his own handle.

We all have our blind spots. The Freak's are dead center.

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:09:55 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Stupid scientists! Apparently they aren't listening to the people that
really know and understand this stuff, conservative politicians and
Rush! If they did, they'd know that despite evidence, this isn't happeneing:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...USTRALIA-REEF/
Pesky little facts - they just keep getting in the way don't they?

"The five-yearly reef outlook report, aimed at benchmarking the health
of the reef, found climate change, declining water quality from
coastal runoff, development and illegal fishing were the biggest
dangers to the reef."

Let's dissect that paragraph:

1 - Climate Change - check.

2 - Polluted water runoff - check.

3 - Development - check.

4 - Illegal fishing - check.

One out of four - that's 25% of the total problem. If I were looking
at this, I might think that there are a lot more problems with the
reef than just climate change.

Why one could almost believe that if the other 75% of the problems
were solved, then maybe the reef might survive.

Here's an interesting little blurb:

"The report, prepared by Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
scientists, says damage will occur from issues such as climate change,
nutrient overload and over-fishing but, if well managed, the ecosystem
should survive better than most other reefs."

Hmmm - nutrient overload and over-fishing. 2/3rds of the problem.
Wonder how that would affect the health of the reef if those were
solved?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

But wait - there's more!!!

http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/k...nfluences.html

Read the non-global warming parts - very interesting. In particular
the part about shipping: groundings, ballast discharge, oil spills,
litter and sewage discharge.

It would appear that "global warming" plays a very minor role in the
problems facing the Great Barrier Reef.

But wait - there's more!!!

http://exoticanimallover.com/2009/02...-barrier-reef/

Pesky little critter huh?

Ah science - gotta love it.

Boy, great post and I bet it took a lot more work than just spewing
bumper sticker ads saying "most scientists, settled science, etc...".


For every article or quote that you have that says it isn't happening, I
can find several that say it is. Wanna bet? SO, again, you're saying
global warming ISN'T happening?

I really wish you would calm down and read some of our posts.. Nobody
here says it isn't happening, we just disagree with the new science that
says it's our fault even though it is based on false readings and only a
minute in history...

--
Wafa free since 2009

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:09:55 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Stupid scientists! Apparently they aren't listening to the people that
really know and understand this stuff, conservative politicians and
Rush! If they did, they'd know that despite evidence, this isn't happeneing:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...USTRALIA-REEF/
Pesky little facts - they just keep getting in the way don't they?

"The five-yearly reef outlook report, aimed at benchmarking the health
of the reef, found climate change, declining water quality from
coastal runoff, development and illegal fishing were the biggest
dangers to the reef."

Let's dissect that paragraph:

1 - Climate Change - check.

2 - Polluted water runoff - check.

3 - Development - check.

4 - Illegal fishing - check.

One out of four - that's 25% of the total problem. If I were looking
at this, I might think that there are a lot more problems with the
reef than just climate change.

Why one could almost believe that if the other 75% of the problems
were solved, then maybe the reef might survive.

Here's an interesting little blurb:

"The report, prepared by Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
scientists, says damage will occur from issues such as climate change,
nutrient overload and over-fishing but, if well managed, the ecosystem
should survive better than most other reefs."

Hmmm - nutrient overload and over-fishing. 2/3rds of the problem.
Wonder how that would affect the health of the reef if those were
solved?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

But wait - there's more!!!

http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/k...nfluences.html

Read the non-global warming parts - very interesting. In particular
the part about shipping: groundings, ballast discharge, oil spills,
litter and sewage discharge.

It would appear that "global warming" plays a very minor role in the
problems facing the Great Barrier Reef.

But wait - there's more!!!

http://exoticanimallover.com/2009/02...-barrier-reef/

Pesky little critter huh?

Ah science - gotta love it.

Boy, great post and I bet it took a lot more work than just spewing
bumper sticker ads saying "most scientists, settled science, etc...".


OH, I get it!!! You think that because the Great Barrier Reef is having
other problems, that it couldn't POSSIBLY be suffering because of global
warming...right??

You need to get up to speed... It's not Global warming anymore, it's
climate change.. Since the world is getting cooler for the last ten
years or so...

--
Wafa free since 2009

JustWait wrote:


I really wish you would calm down and read some of our posts.. Nobody
here says it isn't happening, we just disagree with the new science

You barely got out of high school with a diploma, if you did that, and
the only real job you had, working in a warehouse, you couldn't keep.
So...now you are Mr. Science?

Moron.

In article ,
says...

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:09:55 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Stupid scientists! Apparently they aren't listening to the people that
really know and understand this stuff, conservative politicians and
Rush! If they did, they'd know that despite evidence, this isn't happeneing:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...USTRALIA-REEF/



"The study echoed findings by scientists belonging to the U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change..."

Shoots their credibility out the friggin' window.

Good try, Loogy.
--
Pssssst, do you suppose that the research scientists that are
anti-global warming get grants? Of course they do!

Doubt it...

--
Wafa free since 2009

In article ,
says...

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:30:35 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:38:07 -0400, JustWait penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|In article ,
|says...
|
| No where NEAR "half" of scientists that are studying global warming
| think
|
|Although I agree with the statement so far.... Anyway, there in lies the
|problem.. Most "scientists who are studying global taxing" are deeply
|vested in the economics of studying the issue. That is to say, if there
|is no Global Taxing, they are out of work... snerk...
|
| it has nothing to do with the greenhouse gases that man is spewing
| into the atmosphere. It's amazing that the GOP chooses to heed the words
| of a very few scientists that have a GOP agenda rather than listen to
| the WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.
|
|It's a shame the DNC chooses to heed the words of a very few "however
|vocal" scientists that have a "green" agenda rather than listen to the
|WHOLE STORY and then make an intelligent decision.

Your talking points are showing, but they are fairly devoid of facts.

Ninety-seven percent of the climate scientists surveyed believe
?global average temperatures have increased? during the past century.

Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming
is occurring, and 74% agree that ?currently available scientific
evidence? substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that human
activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are
unsure.
http://stats.org/stories/2008/global..._apr23_08.html
I would like to see a list of "climate scientists" stacked up against
the amount of grants they are receiving to do the research...

Exactly. I didn't see that as one of the questions. It's surely
pertinent.
--

And I'd like to see a list of anti-global warming scientists stacked up
against the amount of grants THEY receive.

Me too. Who is funding them? We know George Soros, and the UN are
funding the advocates... And of course we know the UN is about as
dependable as a junkie with a fresh bag...

--
Wafa free since 2009

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:09:55 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Stupid scientists! Apparently they aren't listening to the people that
really know and understand this stuff, conservative politicians and
Rush! If they did, they'd know that despite evidence, this isn't happeneing:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...USTRALIA-REEF/
Pesky little facts - they just keep getting in the way don't they?

"The five-yearly reef outlook report, aimed at benchmarking the health
of the reef, found climate change, declining water quality from
coastal runoff, development and illegal fishing were the biggest
dangers to the reef."

Let's dissect that paragraph:

1 - Climate Change - check.

2 - Polluted water runoff - check.

3 - Development - check.

4 - Illegal fishing - check.

One out of four - that's 25% of the total problem. If I were looking
at this, I might think that there are a lot more problems with the
reef than just climate change.

Why one could almost believe that if the other 75% of the problems
were solved, then maybe the reef might survive.

Here's an interesting little blurb:

"The report, prepared by Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
scientists, says damage will occur from issues such as climate change,
nutrient overload and over-fishing but, if well managed, the ecosystem
should survive better than most other reefs."

Hmmm - nutrient overload and over-fishing. 2/3rds of the problem.
Wonder how that would affect the health of the reef if those were
solved?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

But wait - there's more!!!

http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/k...nfluences.html

Read the non-global warming parts - very interesting. In particular
the part about shipping: groundings, ballast discharge, oil spills,
litter and sewage discharge.

It would appear that "global warming" plays a very minor role in the
problems facing the Great Barrier Reef.

But wait - there's more!!!

http://exoticanimallover.com/2009/02...-barrier-reef/

Pesky little critter huh?

Ah science - gotta love it.
Boy, great post and I bet it took a lot more work than just spewing
bumper sticker ads saying "most scientists, settled science, etc...".

OH, I get it!!! You think that because the Great Barrier Reef is having
other problems, that it couldn't POSSIBLY be suffering because of global
warming...right??

You need to get up to speed... It's not Global warming anymore, it's
climate change.. Since the world is getting cooler for the last ten
years or so...

Could you answer my question?

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:09:55 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Stupid scientists! Apparently they aren't listening to the people that
really know and understand this stuff, conservative politicians and
Rush! If they did, they'd know that despite evidence, this isn't happeneing:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...USTRALIA-REEF/


"The study echoed findings by scientists belonging to the U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change..."

Shoots their credibility out the friggin' window.

Good try, Loogy.
--
Pssssst, do you suppose that the research scientists that are
anti-global warming get grants? Of course they do!

Doubt it...

Then how are they able to do research?