🚀 go-pugleaf

In article 
<67401ca8-00a9-4553-9b08-e2cc51c65e45@l18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
 Jonesie <caseyterry5959@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Apr 5, 7:59�pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> > In article <eO2dnaVPBqkWdeDSnZ2dnUVZ_smdn...@bright.net>,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > �"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeI...@HotMail.com> wrote:
> > > "Billy" <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote in message
> > >news:wildbilly-5076EA.21573204042012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> > > > In article <Y8ednQjhR_VcfOHSnZ2dnUVZ_qgAA...@giganews.com>,
> > > > RLW <rlwatk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 15:05:30 -0700, Chom Noamsky wrote:
> >
> > > >> > On 3/31/2012 7:27 PM, RLW wrote:
> > > >> >> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:18:28 -0400, Leonard wrote:
> >
> > > >> >>> Abracadabra, �No More Medi�val Warm Period!
> >
> > > >> >>> The lies behind the failed Hockey Stick
> >
> > > >> >> <yada, yada, yada>
> >
> > > >> >> I'm starting to get the impression that few posting here actually 
> > > >> >> know
> > > >> >> what the "hockey stick" graph was intended to represent: runaway,
> > > >> >> nearly limitless increase in surface temperature.
> >
> > > >> >> A) We know that's wrong.
> >
> > > >> >> B) We know that the troposphere is getting warmer.
> >
> > > >> >> (A) does nothing to disprove (B). �Indeed, (B) is something
> > > >> >> *observed*,
> > > >> >> not a matter open to debate.
> >
> > > >> >> (B) means that a lot of weather patterns will change and a lot of 
> > > >> >> ice
> > > >> >> will melt. �This doesn't mean Humanity will die off, but it will be
> > > >> >> very damn' expensive and inconvenient for a good many folks.
> >
> > > >> >> I'll hate having to explain to my grandkids that everyone stood 
> > > >> >> around
> > > >> >> debating whether it was happening instead of figuring out what 
> > > >> >> impact
> > > >> >> it will have and how to solve some of the attendant problems.
> >
> > > >> > The assumption is it that warming will be all bad. �How many studies
> > > >> > have been done on the potential benefits of global warming? �What it
> > > >> > comes down to is the cost of adaption versus the cost of correction.
> > > >> > That's assuming it can be corrected, and in the view of a 
> > > >> > substantial
> > > >> > portion of the scientific community the results would be modest or
> > > >> > negligible at best.
> >
> > > >> > The big problem is elements of the political sphere have been trying
> > > >> > their best to hook irrelevant agendas to climate change, and to 
> > > >> > exploit
> > > >> > it as a tool to push things that wouldn't get backing otherwise. 
> > > >> > �Get
> > > >> > people alarmed, induce feelings of insecurity, then they'll be less
> > > >> > resistant when it comes to unpopular causes that have little or 
> > > >> > nothing
> > > >> > to do with climate change.
> >
> > > >> > It's interesting that the Darrell Kaufman study showed climate has 
> > > >> > been
> > > >> > experiencing a long term cooling trend, starting about 2,000 years 
> > > >> > ago,
> > > >> > and was projected to go on another 4,000 years. Is it possible we're
> > > >> > actually better off with a little warming? �Quite possibly we've
> > > >> > averted
> > > >> > a future LIA...
> >
> > > >> I'm not even assuming that the effects will be all bad. �The first
> > > >> benefits which come to mind are to shipping and farmers in Canada.
> > > >> Still,
> > > >> any sort of large-scale reorganization of society is costly, so we'd 
> > > >> best
> > > >> be puzzling out the details now, before it becomes an immediate 
> > > >> problem.
> >
> > > > Oh, the sweet security of innocence.
> > > > <http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=hit-them-with-the-ho..
> > > > .>
> >
> > > Or is that the sweet security of stupidity
> > > � � Too bad that "hockey stick" is broken.
> >
> > Citation, please, or are you so stoopid as to think your opinion is fact?
> 
> 
> He doesn't need citations.   Nor more than Lord Monckton needs a
> degree in science.

I know. He just shovels the "facts" out of his backside as he needs them.

-- 
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight? 
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.


The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party