What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:55:18 GMT, "tak"
wrote:


"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
news:JbydnUxtSJmJ_yHbnZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@wvfibernet .net...
"tak" wrote
Read the current issue of Newsweek for a pov.

Plethora of vacuousness?

Point/counterpoint till it is last man standing. The claims and theories
have to stand up to scientific scrutiny by peers, not politicians and
business.

So fudging sciencitic data is a theory?

Wow...
If it is fudged, that should be outed by being tested by other qualified
scientists. WOW back to you

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:17:45 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

. and the whole of this is a lot like
trying to nail jello to a tree.

Good point and I will use that.

Love the analogy.

Just read the article, follow the links.

I can't add more than that.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 9, 10:49 pm, "JimH" ask wrote:

How can you argue against global warming when temperatures and rainfalls
over half of the US and in the UK are reaching or surpassing record
highs?

I am not convinced about the human intervention factor but I have to
admit that something is indeed happening
with our climate.

Cyclical? Perhaps.

We need more research.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think a lot of the focus is starting to converge on the figures
about temp and climate etc, that we are being fed. It is turning out
that much of it is false, maybe even intenionally manipulated. There
is a huge amount of money to be made, a lot of grants to be awarded.
All gone if this science is allowed to be challenged.


All I know is what I see. It has been hot and just recently.....wet.

Global warming? Yes. Man made? Not enough proof.

One has to admit that the carbon footprint of China over recent years is
indeed disturbing and has to have an impact on the weather.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Aug 10, 5:07 pm, "JimH" ask wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Aug 9, 10:49 pm, "JimH" ask wrote:
How can you argue against global warming when temperatures and rainfalls
over half of the US and in the UK are reaching or surpassing record
highs?

I am not convinced about the human intervention factor but I have to
admit that something is indeed happening
with our climate.

Cyclical? Perhaps.

We need more research.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think a lot of the focus is starting to converge on the figures
about temp and climate etc, that we are being fed. It is turning out
that much of it is false, maybe even intenionally manipulated. There
is a huge amount of money to be made, a lot of grants to be awarded.
All gone if this science is allowed to be challenged.

All I know is what I see. It has been hot and just recently.....wet.

Global warming? Yes. Man made? Not enough proof.

One has to admit that the carbon footprint of China over recent years is
indeed disturbing and has to have an impact on the weather.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So your suggesting you "feel" the what point five degrees your weather
may have risen in the last what, 50 years?? I grew up here where I am
now, and personally I can't notice the extra half degree? People are
freezing in Peru but the news is not covering that. So many of the
temp gathering mechanism has been altered, moved or tampered with, I
don't think anyone really knows if it is even getting hotter, relative
to the age of the earth.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 10, 5:07 pm, "JimH" ask wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Aug 9, 10:49 pm, "JimH" ask wrote:
How can you argue against global warming when temperatures and
rainfalls
over half of the US and in the UK are reaching or surpassing record
highs?

I am not convinced about the human intervention factor but I have to
admit that something is indeed happening
with our climate.

Cyclical? Perhaps.

We need more research.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think a lot of the focus is starting to converge on the figures
about temp and climate etc, that we are being fed. It is turning out
that much of it is false, maybe even intenionally manipulated. There
is a huge amount of money to be made, a lot of grants to be awarded.
All gone if this science is allowed to be challenged.

All I know is what I see. It has been hot and just recently.....wet.

Global warming? Yes. Man made? Not enough proof.

One has to admit that the carbon footprint of China over recent years is
indeed disturbing and has to have an impact on the weather.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So your suggesting you "feel" the what point five degrees your weather
may have risen in the last what, 50 years?? I grew up here where I am
now, and personally I can't notice the extra half degree? People are
freezing in Peru but the news is not covering that. So many of the
temp gathering mechanism has been altered, moved or tampered with, I
don't think anyone really knows if it is even getting hotter, relative
to the age of the earth.


Yes, I feel the hot and humid summer we are experiencing this year. No
offence but you have to be constantly numb not to realize that global
warming is happening. Whether or not it is caused by man or just cylical is
the question.

China's industrial growth over the past decade or so cannot be dismissed in
the discussion.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:03:59 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:08:33 -0000,
wrote:

I think a lot of the focus is starting to converge on the figures
about temp and climate etc, that we are being fed. It is turning out
that much of it is false, maybe even intenionally manipulated. There
is a huge amount of money to be made, a lot of grants to be awarded.
All gone if this science is allowed to be challenged.

It gets even better than that.

The placement of the measuring devices are also suspect.

As in placing a est of instruments in the middle of an asphalt parking
lot.

Think it's going to be hotter there? :)

Now, that's not at all fair. It's much more fair to say the measuring
devices were placed in the middle of cornfields. Then, the cornfields
became asphalt parking lots or runways.
--
John H

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Aug 10, 6:39 pm, Gene Kearns
wrote:

This is not the time to talk to me about this, anyway..... been
working on the boat today.... making up some cables and moving a
battery..... heat index of 117F.

What am I supposed to believe when I read:
"At 237 PM this afternoon... the temperature at the Raleigh-Durham
Intl Airport reached 104 degrees. This breaks the old record of 99
set in 2001.
101 degrees sets a record maximum at Danville Virginia for todays
date... breaking the old record of 99 in 1987.
99 degrees sets a record maximum at Roanoke Virginia for todays
date... breaking the old record of 97 in 1977.
92 degrees ties the record maximum at Blacksburg Virginia for todays
date set in 1983
a record high temperature of 98 degrees was set at Wilmington today.
This breaks the old record of 97 set in 1979.
A record high temperature of 105 degrees was set at Florence today.
This breaks the old record of 98 set in 1963."


I wonder if that is for the season, or just the date. I wonder if it
is a trend, or just a fluke as we know we really don't know if we are
just in a normal cycle. But at the same time, I think although kind of
trolling, I have pretty much stated my opinion (if not overstated for
fun) on GW. I also agree it is time to go work on the boat, it rained
here all day, coldest weather I remember in August in a while;) But it
is clearing and me and the family are heading for the water in the
morning. Good boating to everyone this weekend.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:39:47 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:



What am I supposed to believe when I read:
"At 237 PM this afternoon... the temperature at the Raleigh-Durham
Intl Airport reached 104 degrees. This breaks the old record of 99
set in 2001.
101 degrees sets a record maximum at Danville Virginia for todays
date... breaking the old record of 99 in 1987.
99 degrees sets a record maximum at Roanoke Virginia for todays
date... breaking the old record of 97 in 1977.
92 degrees ties the record maximum at Blacksburg Virginia for todays
date set in 1983
a record high temperature of 98 degrees was set at Wilmington today.
This breaks the old record of 97 set in 1979.
A record high temperature of 105 degrees was set at Florence today.
This breaks the old record of 98 set in 1963."

Believe that it's all Al Gore's doing. Then you can just accept the
posts saying the same, and get on with your boat.

--Vic

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:39:47 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

What am I supposed to believe when I read:
"At 237 PM this afternoon... the temperature at the Raleigh-Durham
Intl Airport reached 104 degrees. This breaks the old record of 99
set in 2001.

That it's hotter today than it was on the same date in 2001.

So?

Was it hotter in 02,03,03,05,06? How about '95 to 2000? Cooler?
What's the scale here - what exactly are you comparing to?

Here's the historical min/max for Bradely Field, Hartford, CT for
today.

Numbers are Normal, Record, Year.

MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE (F) 84 100 1949 MINIMUM TEMPERATURE
(F) 62 45 1964

It's currently 50 (F) on my handy dandy calibrated weather thingy.

Am I experiencing Global Cooling because, with the exception of last
week, it's been pretty average month of June, July and August in New
England from an historical perspective.

Also, consider this. The Raliegh/Durham Airport site, I believe, is
located at the radar site which used to be at the far end of the
runway (I can't remember which one). Have you compared the
temperatures at Raliegh/Durham to stations at Duke, NC State and UNC?
Are they generally higher/lower/match?

The official temperature in CT is recorded at Bradley Field, E.
Granby, CT. It is consistently higher than my station, the Orchard's
station, Marionapolis Prep in Thompson and Pomfret Prep in Pomfret -
all four stations are identical and calibrated. The reason is that
Bradley's station is located at the end of a runway and right next to
the parking lot at the Connecticut Fire School. Ours are located
properly on grass, in the open and away from buildings.

It's not evidence of anything - only historical trends give any
validity in historical context.

Do I believe that humanity affects the environment? Yes. Do I
believe that pollution is a problem? Yes. Do I believe in Global
Warming? No.

Everytime you turn around, there is another scientist massaging data,
or as in the case of Hansen, using a flawed program and flawed data to
reach a conclusion which everybody hails as "consensus". Even more to
the point, the very scientists who were cited in "Inconvienent Truth"
are now begining to say "wait - not so fast" or in one case "that's
not what I said".

I have no quarrel with anybody who believes in Global Warming -
nothing I say is going to convince those who believe and place all
others in Apocryphal status.

It is what it is.

What? You mean 1998 wasn't.....
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:39:47 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

What am I supposed to believe when I read:
"At 237 PM this afternoon... the temperature at the Raleigh-Durham
Intl Airport reached 104 degrees. This breaks the old record of 99
set in 2001.



I have no quarrel with anybody who believes in Global Warming -
nothing I say is going to convince those who believe and place all
others in Apocryphal status.

It is what it is.


No one is seeking your approval or disapproval on this Tom, especially
considering that nothing that is posted here will change your mind........or
anyone else's for that matter.

Like Gene said...........you would have better luck nailing Jello on a wall.

Believe what you want...........it is only important..............to you.
;-)