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/

In article ,
says...

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/

Nobody doubts it happening, we just are listening to the other half of
he worlds scientists, who don't agree it's our fault and Mercury filled
green bulbs and ugly little cars are the solution...

--
Wafa free since 2009

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
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/

Nobody doubts it happening, we just are listening to the other half of
he worlds scientists, who don't agree it's our fault and Mercury filled
green bulbs and ugly little cars are the solution...


No where NEAR "half" of scientists that are studying global warming
think 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.

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
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/

Nobody doubts it happening, we just are listening to the other half of
he worlds scientists, who don't agree it's our fault and Mercury filled
green bulbs and ugly little cars are the solution...



Half?

Moron.

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.


--
Wafa free since 2009

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...

--
Wafa free since 2009

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...



What would an intellectual numnutz like you do with such a list?
You didn't even have the skills to hang onto a warehouse job...now you
want to judge the credentials of scientists?

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



"Climate" Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don’t
Trust the Media’s Coverage of Climate Change

If man has had any effects of the changing climate, it is in the form of
paved streets, parking lots, asphalt roofs, etc. not "Greenhouse Gases"
(I suspect the gases coming from the white house and democrats in
congress are doing more damage than greenhouse gases)

If you will look at the long term science studies like paleontology and
archeology, you will see that the temperatures current earth climate are
at a peak that has periodically occurred over the last several hundreds
of thousand years. If we had any thing to fear from the climate it
would be significant drops in temperature not warming as shown by those
studies.

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.

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...".

--
Wafa free since 2009