🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <QoGdnbNitoAAkRzSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@bright.net>,
 "SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote:

> "Billy" <wildbilly@withoutta.net> wrote in message 
> news:wildbilly-580543.15355306042012@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> > 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-h
> >> > > > o..
> >> > > > .>
> >> >
> >> > > 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.
> >
> 
> Funny how I did give you bozos a nice page full of cites.
> But then warmistas are generally stupid and uneducated, and consider AGW as 
> some new "religion"
>  

Let's see, making people laugh isn't a bad thing, so I'll let that 
slide, but the page of citations that you offered requires some vetting. 
So let's look into your hungarian chamber pot and see what's there.
The cite you gave was 
<http://www.google.com/search?aq=2&oq=hockey+stick+global+warming&ix=seb&
sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=hockey+stick+global+warming+debunked>
which translates into a query for "hockey stick global warming debunked".
You were only looking for denier sites, weasel.

When you google the neutral phrase "hockey stick global warming", you 
get a page of pros & cons. 
<https://www.google.com/search?q=hockey+stick+global+warming&ie=utf-8&oe=
utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a>
So it appears that you, much like your chamber pot, are full of crap.

There is even an informative interview with Michael Manning where he 
debunks the deniers, and trashes your "Little Ice Age, and Medieval 
Warming Period" conundrum in only a few words.

<http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=behind-the-hockey-stick
>
More recently, Mann battled back in a 2004 corrigendum in the journal 
Nature, in which he clarified the presentation of his data. He has also 
shown how errors on the part of his attackers led to their specific 
results. For instance, skeptics often cite the Little Ice Age and 
Medieval Warming Period as pieces of evidence not reflected in the 
hockey stick, yet 
these extremes are examples of regional, 
not global, phenomena. 
"From an intellectual point of view, these contrarians are pathetic, 
because there's no scientific validity to their arguments whatsoever," 
Mann says. "But they're very skilled at deducing what sorts of 
disingenuous arguments and untruths are likely to be believable to the 
public that doesn't know better." 

Mann thinks that the attacks will continue, because many skeptics, such 
as the Greening Earth Society and the Tech Central Station Web site, 
obtain funds from petroleum interests. "As long as they think it works 
and they've got unlimited money to perpetuate their disinformation 
campaign," Mann believes, "I imagine it will go on, just as it went on 
for years and years with tobacco until it was no longer tenable--in 
fact, it became perjurable to get up in a public forum and claim that 
there was no science" behind the health hazards of smoking. 

(cont.)
-----

So as you see, my little chamber pot, only your intellect has failed. 
The hockey stick is alive and well.
---------

-- 
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the 
merger of state and corporate power."
 - attributed to Benito Mussolini.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_vN0--mHug>