BoatBanter.com - Heads up, Harry...

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - Heads up, Harry... (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/71524-heads-up-harry.html)

Heads up, Harry...

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
If Mars and the Earth are warming and cooling on the same cycle then it
would lead anyone with any intelligence to conclude that forces outside
of the two planets are the cause of the warming and cooling.
So, like Mr Question Mark and his twin, you also believe that our human
activities have ZERO EFFECT on global warming. Right?
What percentage of global warming on earth do you attribute to the human
effect? Also, what percentage of global warming on Mars do you attribute
to human effect?

I've read this several times, and yet, and do not see an answer to the
simple question I asked you. One last time. I'll put some more space before
the question so it's easy for you to see.
Why do you want others to answer your questions when you won't answer
their questions?

Do you believe that the human contribution to global warming is ZERO?
I believe that the effect that humans have on global warming is
statistically insignificant. If I had to put a percentage on it it would
be 0.0000000000001%

Please show evidence of that number. And if you can cite any scientific
data that backs that number up, then show how that would or would not
be significant.

You couldn't comprehend the explanation because it is bigger than all of
us. As I said before, there are forces greater than man at work and the
effects of those forces can be seen on other heavenly bodies but, you
are blind to them.

If you are so sure I'm Kevin, you'd have no risk. Care to take the
challenge? Put up, or shut up.

Heads up, Harry...

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
If Mars and the Earth are warming and cooling on the same cycle then it
would lead anyone with any intelligence to conclude that forces outside
of the two planets are the cause of the warming and cooling.
So, like Mr Question Mark and his twin, you also believe that our human
activities have ZERO EFFECT on global warming. Right?
What percentage of global warming on earth do you attribute to the human
effect? Also, what percentage of global warming on Mars do you attribute
to human effect?
I've read this several times, and yet, and do not see an answer to the
simple question I asked you. One last time. I'll put some more space before
the question so it's easy for you to see.
Why do you want others to answer your questions when you won't answer
their questions?

Do you believe that the human contribution to global warming is ZERO?
I believe that the effect that humans have on global warming is
statistically insignificant. If I had to put a percentage on it it would
be 0.0000000000001%
Please show evidence of that number. And if you can cite any scientific
data that backs that number up, then show how that would or would not
be significant.

You couldn't comprehend the explanation because it is bigger than all of
us. As I said before, there are forces greater than man at work and the
effects of those forces can be seen on other heavenly bodies but, you
are blind to them.

If you are so sure I'm Kevin, you'd have no risk. Care to take the
challenge? Put up, or shut up.

You are Kevin Noble, the pot growing and pot smoking idiot from Georgia.

Heads up, Harry...

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

? wrote:

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ps.com...

When you give me your evidence backing up YOUR statements that:
1. Global warming is "all mother nature (not humans)
It is IMPOSSIBLE for our activities to NOT have an effect on global
warming. Anyone who wasn't picking their nose all through high
school
physics is aware of this fact.
Please quantify the HUMAN effect.
He can't quantify the human effect becasue there is not informaiton
from
observation to forum a consensus on the human effect of the global
warming
equation.

This discussion is not about HOW MUCH effect. It's about a simple
idea: Do
we have any effect greater than none, or not. We have to conduct this
discussion in baby steps, for reasons obvious to everyone except
those who
require the baby steps.
The effect that we, the human race, have upon earth's global warming is
statistically insignificant, when compared to other forces at play in
the whole global warming of planets issue.
Proof? Let's see those university studies that prove the above
sentence.

The fact that you attribute so much effect to humans shows that rather
than having your finger up your nose in high school physics class you
instead had your head up your ass.
Petty and childish name calling and silly insults certainly clears up
the issue, huh?

The KING has spoken. Thanks, Kevin.
Kevin will be back on the newsgroup Monday morning, expect a snide
retort then.
Bert, care to take the $5000 challenge to prove that I'm not Kevin? Put
up or shut up.

Sure, you go first and if I believe you I might give you $5.00.

What's the matter, not willing to risk the money, little guy? If you
are so damned sure of yourself, there is no risk. Put up or shut up.

Why are you so hung up on $5000? If it is the principle of the thing
then a bet of $1 should suffice.

Heads up, Harry...

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:20:07 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:

Why are you so hung up on $5000? If it is the principle of the thing
then a bet of $1 should suffice.

The cause is the Breast Cancer Foundation, to which $5000 means more than
$1,
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Heads up, Harry...

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:20:07 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:

Why are you so hung up on $5000? If it is the principle of the thing
then a bet of $1 should suffice.

The cause is the Breast Cancer Foundation, to which $5000 means more than
$1,

I have numerous other charities that I contribute too for specific reasons.

Kevin is trying to bully people into a contribution under the guise of a
wager.

If Kevin is really interested in proving me wrong then he will be
willing to make a gentleman's bet of $1.

Heads up, Harry...

you're absolutely right John, especially for your daughters cause.
Agreed! $5K IS worth more than a buck.

but his name isn't......

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:20:07 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:

Why are you so hung up on $5000? If it is the principle of the thing
then a bet of $1 should suffice.

The cause is the Breast Cancer Foundation, to which $5000 means more than
$1,
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Heads up, Harry...

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:42:37 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:20:07 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:

Why are you so hung up on $5000? If it is the principle of the thing
then a bet of $1 should suffice.

The cause is the Breast Cancer Foundation, to which $5000 means more than
$1,

I have numerous other charities that I contribute too for specific reasons.

Kevin is trying to bully people into a contribution under the guise of a
wager.

If Kevin is really interested in proving me wrong then he will be
willing to make a gentleman's bet of $1.

Nope. If I were bk, I'd hold out for the $5000. If you're sure of yourself,
what've you got to lose? If you're not sure, then maybe it's just
name-calling.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John