On Dec 3, 10:08 am, wrote:
On Dec 2, 8:30 pm, wrote:





On Dec 2, 8:23 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

wrote in message

...

On Dec 2, 7:59 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Dec 2, 7:28 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message

m...

Sorry to interrupt the usual drivel in here, but
I did want to report good customer service from Raymarine.

I have a Ray fishfinder/depthfinder on son of Yo Ho. I didn't think
the
display was bright enough, so last September I called and asked what
to
do. I was told to simply return the unit after the boating season
and
Ray's service department would look it over.

Sent the unit back last week, got a phone call Wednesday, told there
was
nothing out of the ordinary, but the company was sending a brand new
unit
just to make sure.

It arrived yesterday.

Cool.

Oh...side benefit...everyone I spoke with at Ray spoke English
properly,
with a solid Yankee accent!

I'd tell you what's paying for that great service, but it would turn
this
into a political discussion. It's enough to say that it's your tax
dollars,
and that you should buy as much RTN stock as you can afford, along
with
some
HRS.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Aren't you the one who went all tin foil hat about some kids website a
couple of months back?

No. You must be imagining that.

Right now, explain how you came to that conclusion based on what I said.
Do
it carefully. Remember that you are disabled.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No Joe, it was you. You freaked out and told us we were all
downloading some malware by clicking on the kids site. The kid post
the site every few months, been doing it for years... smerk...

OK. You're right.

Now, explain your tin foil hat bull****, and how it made sense as a response
to my stock suggestions.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think you see conspiracy where it is not, and I think your personal
politics leads your imagination.

Sort of like 90%+ of scientists that are lying about global warming?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, only about 50%, the other 50% see it the other way. But as with
the 90% figure, we know that "your side" is willing to lie...

On Dec 3, 10:32 am, wrote:
On Dec 3, 10:08 am, wrote:





On Dec 2, 8:30 pm, wrote:

On Dec 2, 8:23 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

wrote in message

...

On Dec 2, 7:59 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Dec 2, 7:28 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message

m...

Sorry to interrupt the usual drivel in here, but
I did want to report good customer service from Raymarine.

I have a Ray fishfinder/depthfinder on son of Yo Ho. I didn't think
the
display was bright enough, so last September I called and asked what
to
do. I was told to simply return the unit after the boating season
and
Ray's service department would look it over.

Sent the unit back last week, got a phone call Wednesday, told there
was
nothing out of the ordinary, but the company was sending a brand new
unit
just to make sure.

It arrived yesterday.

Cool.

Oh...side benefit...everyone I spoke with at Ray spoke English
properly,
with a solid Yankee accent!

I'd tell you what's paying for that great service, but it would turn
this
into a political discussion. It's enough to say that it's your tax
dollars,
and that you should buy as much RTN stock as you can afford, along
with
some
HRS.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Aren't you the one who went all tin foil hat about some kids website a
couple of months back?

No. You must be imagining that.

Right now, explain how you came to that conclusion based on what I said.
Do
it carefully. Remember that you are disabled.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No Joe, it was you. You freaked out and told us we were all
downloading some malware by clicking on the kids site. The kid post
the site every few months, been doing it for years... smerk...

OK. You're right.

Now, explain your tin foil hat bull****, and how it made sense as a response
to my stock suggestions.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think you see conspiracy where it is not, and I think your personal
politics leads your imagination.

Sort of like 90%+ of scientists that are lying about global warming?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, only about 50%, the other 50% see it the other way. But as with
the 90% figure, we know that "your side" is willing to lie...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[edit] American Meteorological Society
The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their
council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at the
Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been increasing
in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that the abundance
of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over the same
period. In the past decade, significant progress has been made toward
a better understanding of the climate system and toward improved
projections of long-term climate change... Human activities have
become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency are
the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance of
greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase, we
are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither
planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented
challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant
impacts on our natural and societal systems

[edit] American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement [11] adopted by the
society in 2003 affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases will
cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

Human activities are increasingly altering the Earth's climate. These
effects add to natural influences that have been present over Earth's
history. Scientific evidence strongly indicates that natural
influences cannot explain the rapid increase in global near-surface
temperatures observed during the second half of the 20th century.
Human impacts on the climate system include increasing concentrations
of atmospheric greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon dioxide,
chlorofluorocarbons and their substitutes, methane, nitrous oxide,
etc.), air pollution, increasing concentrations of airborne particles,
and land alteration. A particular concern is that atmospheric levels
of carbon dioxide may be rising faster than at any time in Earth's
history, except possibly following rare events like impacts from large
extraterrestrial objects.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have increased since the
mid-1700s through fossil fuel burning and changes in land use, with
more than 80% of this increase occurring since 1900. Moreover,
research indicates that increased levels of carbon dioxide will remain
in the atmosphere for hundreds to thousands of years. It is virtually
certain that increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases will cause global surface climate to be
warmer.

American Institute of Physics
The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics endorsed the
AGU statement on human-induced climate change:[12]

The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics has endorsed
a position statement on climate change adopted by the American
Geophysical Union (AGU) Council in December 2003.

[edit] American Astronomical Society
The American Astronomical Society has endorsed the AGU statement:[13]

In endorsing the "Human Impacts on Climate" statement, the AAS
recognizes the collective expertise of the AGU in scientific subfields
central to assessing and understanding global change, and acknowledges
the strength of agreement among our AGU colleagues that the global
climate is changing and human activities are contributing to that
change.

[edit] Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
On May 2, 2006, the Federal Climate Change Science Program
commissioned by the Bush administration in 2002 released the first of
21 assessments. Though it did not state what percentage of climate
change might be anthropogenic, the assessment concluded:

Studies ... show clear evidence of human influences on the climate
system (due to changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and
stratospheric ozone). ... The observed patterns of change over the
past 50 years cannot be explained by natural processes alone, nor by
the effects of short-lived atmospheric constituents (such as aerosols
and tropospheric ozone) alone.[14]

And on and on........

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 06:48:55 -0800 (PST), wrote:



And on and on........

Please view: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Be sure to view all parts.

And on and on......
--
John H