Proof there is a 'God' (or at least someone with a sense of humour)
-
The following is a partial list of the events described in various media sources as instances of the Gore Effect: January 15, 2004 – A global warming rally was held in New York City which suffered one of the city's coldest days in history.[5][16] November 2006 – Al Gore visited Australia to speak about global warming two weeks before summer began, and it snowed.[11][16] March 2008 – A congressional media briefing on the Bingaman/Specter Climate Bill was purportedly canceled due to a cold snap.[5] May 2008 - Gore delivers a speech at a climate change conference in Lima, Peru at the same time the city experiences an unseasonable cold spell.[16] October 2008 – London saw the first snow since 1922 while the House of Commons debated the Climate Change Bill.[5][16] October 2008 – Gore appeared at Harvard University, which "coincided with low temperatures that challenged 125-year records."[5] March 2009 – Driving snow caused problems at an event billed as "the biggest global warming protest in history" in Washington.[5] October 2009 - Gore gives a speech in Wisconsin amidst frost and near-record low temperatures.[17] December 2009 – Over four inches of snow fell in Copenhagen during the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference as temperatures dipped to below 25°F, not including wind chill.[11][18][^] Pithy isnt quite strong enough to describe the gore effect, but anyway, it makes you think there is someone up there with a sense of humour at least.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
The following is a partial list of the events described in various media sources as instances of the Gore Effect: January 15, 2004 – A global warming rally was held in New York City which suffered one of the city's coldest days in history.[5][16] November 2006 – Al Gore visited Australia to speak about global warming two weeks before summer began, and it snowed.[11][16] March 2008 – A congressional media briefing on the Bingaman/Specter Climate Bill was purportedly canceled due to a cold snap.[5] May 2008 - Gore delivers a speech at a climate change conference in Lima, Peru at the same time the city experiences an unseasonable cold spell.[16] October 2008 – London saw the first snow since 1922 while the House of Commons debated the Climate Change Bill.[5][16] October 2008 – Gore appeared at Harvard University, which "coincided with low temperatures that challenged 125-year records."[5] March 2009 – Driving snow caused problems at an event billed as "the biggest global warming protest in history" in Washington.[5] October 2009 - Gore gives a speech in Wisconsin amidst frost and near-record low temperatures.[17] December 2009 – Over four inches of snow fell in Copenhagen during the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference as temperatures dipped to below 25°F, not including wind chill.[11][18][^] Pithy isnt quite strong enough to describe the gore effect, but anyway, it makes you think there is someone up there with a sense of humour at least.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
The Australian one is ridiculous. We have snow fields, so what ? All of this is predecated on a gross misunderstanding of what climate change, as presented by scientists, actually means and predicts. So it snowed. So what ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
The Australian one is ridiculous. We have snow fields, so what ? All of this is predecated on a gross misunderstanding of what climate change, as presented by scientists, actually means and predicts. So it snowed. So what ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Denying we have an effect on the environment is like how BP denies there are underwater oil plumes.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
Denying we have an effect on the environment is like how BP denies there are underwater oil plumes.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
Good analogy.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
The Australian one is ridiculous. We have snow fields, so what ? All of this is predecated on a gross misunderstanding of what climate change, as presented by scientists, actually means and predicts. So it snowed. So what ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
All of this is predecated on a gross misunderstanding of what climate change, as presented by scientists, actually means and predicts
Actually its suposed to be funny. Which it is. Sure, climate change (well, now its climate change and not global warming), does predict wiild weather, chaos, floods, ice, storms, snow, death, disease, destruction, riots, warfare, famine, drought and insect storms. In fact just about everythinbg short of showers of herring and plagues of cats. Although I am sure some GW scientist is dying to find in their favour too... No, originally, good old GW meant, just that, glohbalwarming. A slight rise of perhaps a degree or two or three, with the resultant reduciton in snow and cold. The fact that so many GW rallies have been blighted with such cold and snow is ironical in the extreme. To the point one is tempted to believe in the intervention of a humourous god.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Christian Graus wrote:
All of this is predecated on a gross misunderstanding of what climate change, as presented by scientists, actually means and predicts
Actually its suposed to be funny. Which it is. Sure, climate change (well, now its climate change and not global warming), does predict wiild weather, chaos, floods, ice, storms, snow, death, disease, destruction, riots, warfare, famine, drought and insect storms. In fact just about everythinbg short of showers of herring and plagues of cats. Although I am sure some GW scientist is dying to find in their favour too... No, originally, good old GW meant, just that, glohbalwarming. A slight rise of perhaps a degree or two or three, with the resultant reduciton in snow and cold. The fact that so many GW rallies have been blighted with such cold and snow is ironical in the extreme. To the point one is tempted to believe in the intervention of a humourous god.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
(well, now its climate change and not global warming),
Global Warming was ALWAYS a gross simplification of the theory.
fat_boy wrote:
does predict wiild weather, chaos, floods, ice, storms, snow, death, disease, destruction, riots, warfare, famine, drought and insect storms
Well, for example, the media has predicted sea rises of 10 metres. No scientist has ever said more than 'if all the ice melts, the rise will be 10 metres, but that's less than 5% likely to happen'. Your problem is that your source is the mainstream media.
fat_boy wrote:
ironical
Is this even a word ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
fat_boy wrote:
(well, now its climate change and not global warming),
Global Warming was ALWAYS a gross simplification of the theory.
fat_boy wrote:
does predict wiild weather, chaos, floods, ice, storms, snow, death, disease, destruction, riots, warfare, famine, drought and insect storms
Well, for example, the media has predicted sea rises of 10 metres. No scientist has ever said more than 'if all the ice melts, the rise will be 10 metres, but that's less than 5% likely to happen'. Your problem is that your source is the mainstream media.
fat_boy wrote:
ironical
Is this even a word ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Global Warming was ALWAYS a gross simplification of the theory.
And yet the idea that CO2 could cause warming was considered a gross simplification (by the Royal Society, admitedly before they got paid by Thatcher to demonise CO2). Look, the supposition that CO2 causes warming, thus extra CO2 causes extra warming is the very basis of the theory of CO2 induced global warming. It IS simplistic. It doesnt take into account anyother factors. Global Warming IS a gross simplificaiton of the earths climatic system. As we are now finding out, given that they are now adding cloud and water vapour feedbacks to the climate models, which previously had been nased on this grotesquely simplistic supposition.
Christian Graus wrote:
Your problem is that your source is the mainstream media.
My propblem is indeed the kind of crap that infiltrates (or at least did) popular belief. Like in the film AI, a film in all respects is totally unconnected with GW, yet managed to bludgeon our sensibilities with its simplistic message over and over again.
Christian Graus wrote:
Is this even a word ?
Probably not, but then many English words are completely made up so why not continue in the same fashion eh?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Global Warming was ALWAYS a gross simplification of the theory.
And yet the idea that CO2 could cause warming was considered a gross simplification (by the Royal Society, admitedly before they got paid by Thatcher to demonise CO2). Look, the supposition that CO2 causes warming, thus extra CO2 causes extra warming is the very basis of the theory of CO2 induced global warming. It IS simplistic. It doesnt take into account anyother factors. Global Warming IS a gross simplificaiton of the earths climatic system. As we are now finding out, given that they are now adding cloud and water vapour feedbacks to the climate models, which previously had been nased on this grotesquely simplistic supposition.
Christian Graus wrote:
Your problem is that your source is the mainstream media.
My propblem is indeed the kind of crap that infiltrates (or at least did) popular belief. Like in the film AI, a film in all respects is totally unconnected with GW, yet managed to bludgeon our sensibilities with its simplistic message over and over again.
Christian Graus wrote:
Is this even a word ?
Probably not, but then many English words are completely made up so why not continue in the same fashion eh?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Probably not, but then many English words are completely made up so why not continue in the same fashion eh?
Of all the little tricks you use to prop up your arguments and make yourself sound smarter, this is the worst one. Mocking the language constantly to belittle those that use it as their primary language in order to belittle them is about as junior high in mentality and debate tactics as one can manage. The fact that half the time you mock it after being called on not knowing how it works is all the more telling. Just stop. If you can't use the language correctly, or can't be bothered to use such a bad language, then by all means, stfu. Acting like it is distatesful to go down to our level and use such a barbaric language (one you seem more than happy to incorrectly critique) is annoying and has gotten to the point where you are just sounding like a spoiled child. You don't like using English, fine, stop using it. Otherwise use it correctly, and stop bitching about having to use it.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
fat_boy wrote:
Probably not, but then many English words are completely made up so why not continue in the same fashion eh?
Of all the little tricks you use to prop up your arguments and make yourself sound smarter, this is the worst one. Mocking the language constantly to belittle those that use it as their primary language in order to belittle them is about as junior high in mentality and debate tactics as one can manage. The fact that half the time you mock it after being called on not knowing how it works is all the more telling. Just stop. If you can't use the language correctly, or can't be bothered to use such a bad language, then by all means, stfu. Acting like it is distatesful to go down to our level and use such a barbaric language (one you seem more than happy to incorrectly critique) is annoying and has gotten to the point where you are just sounding like a spoiled child. You don't like using English, fine, stop using it. Otherwise use it correctly, and stop bitching about having to use it.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Mocking the language constantly to belittle those that use it as their primary language in order to belittle them
Hang on, you mocked my mis use or ironic in order to make me look an idiot in order to draw attention away from the fact that Al Gore seems to generate redord cold and snow whereever he goes, and you accuse me of doing the same thing? And in any case I wasnt mocking it any more than it deserves. Aparently SHakespere invented 2000 words, used adjectives as adverbs and generally played fast and loose with English in a way that today we would call barbaric.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Just stop. If you can't use the language correctly,
HA! I happen to know alot more about English precisely becuase I know Dutch and French, languages in which English has its roots. My god, dont you realise what a bastardistion English is? Its a mess. OK an ammusing, flexible, colourfull mess, but it is a mess alright. Just loook at at plurals. Most use the french 's', but some the saxon 'en'. As for pronunciation, its a joke. 'The cat with nine lives lives next door'. Why are 'lives' and 'lives' pronounced differently? Not to mention 'coal' and 'hole', why DO they sound the same? Anyway, as to whether 'ironical' exists, I just checked, it looks like it does: http://www.bing.com/search?q=ironical&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC[^] Ha so there! ;P
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription