Snowicane
-
That's what Accuweather is colling it, with winds equal to a force 1 hurricane. Boston is destined for a foot of snow which means that the rest of eastern new England is probably looking at 15" or more. Storm warnings extend from Massachusetts to the mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee, according to the weather service. Federal employees in Washington were told they could leave two hours early.[^] As long as they put their right hand on their flavor of holy book and swore that they still believed in Global Warming.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
-
That's what Accuweather is colling it, with winds equal to a force 1 hurricane. Boston is destined for a foot of snow which means that the rest of eastern new England is probably looking at 15" or more. Storm warnings extend from Massachusetts to the mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee, according to the weather service. Federal employees in Washington were told they could leave two hours early.[^] As long as they put their right hand on their flavor of holy book and swore that they still believed in Global Warming.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
Oakman wrote:
As long as they put their right hand on their flavor of holy book and swore that they still believed in Global Warming.
Perhaps they are just not as ignorant as the morons who assume that global warming means it will never be cold again anywhere, ever. Perhaps they've even read a book or two and understand what the proponents of AGW claim is likely to happen.
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.
-
Oakman wrote:
As long as they put their right hand on their flavor of holy book and swore that they still believed in Global Warming.
Perhaps they are just not as ignorant as the morons who assume that global warming means it will never be cold again anywhere, ever. Perhaps they've even read a book or two and understand what the proponents of AGW claim is likely to happen.
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.
Lighten up, Christian. Throwing words around like "morons," and trying to pick a fight over jokes, doesn't become you. But for the record: "Global warming means no snow or cold in DC." Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who flies around on private planes so as to tell larger numbers of people how they must live their lives in order to save the planet, wrote a column last year on the lack of winter weather in Washington. Is he one of the morons you are talking about? "The Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035." Is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U. N.'s nter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, one of those morons? A little while ago, Professor Phil Jones, who is at the center of the “Climategate” affair, conceded that there has been no “statistically significant” rise in temperatures since 1995. He said that warming recorded by weather stations was often caused by local factors rather than global change. Is this very prominent professor at the School of Environmental Sciences in East Anglia one of the morons you are talking about? In 2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,said that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event” Another one of the morons? I could go on, but I have got to sort my socks today. A much more rewarding occupation that trying to convince you that the world isn't flat. ;)
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
-
Lighten up, Christian. Throwing words around like "morons," and trying to pick a fight over jokes, doesn't become you. But for the record: "Global warming means no snow or cold in DC." Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who flies around on private planes so as to tell larger numbers of people how they must live their lives in order to save the planet, wrote a column last year on the lack of winter weather in Washington. Is he one of the morons you are talking about? "The Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035." Is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U. N.'s nter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, one of those morons? A little while ago, Professor Phil Jones, who is at the center of the “Climategate” affair, conceded that there has been no “statistically significant” rise in temperatures since 1995. He said that warming recorded by weather stations was often caused by local factors rather than global change. Is this very prominent professor at the School of Environmental Sciences in East Anglia one of the morons you are talking about? In 2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,said that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event” Another one of the morons? I could go on, but I have got to sort my socks today. A much more rewarding occupation that trying to convince you that the world isn't flat. ;)
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
Oakman wrote:
Lighten up, Christian. Throwing words around like "morons," and trying to pick a fight over jokes, doesn't become you.
Perhaps. It's usually fat_boy, but I just get sick of deliberate ignorance.
Oakman wrote:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,
Someone seeking a soundbite, not a scientist.
Oakman wrote:
"The Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035." Is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U. N.'s nter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, one of those morons?
That's possible, there's a lot of places where ice is thinning. But, it's a prediction, I'd love to know the context, and if he said it in absolute terms.
Oakman wrote:
A little while ago, Professor Phil Jones, who is at the center of the “Climategate” affair, conceded that there has been no “statistically significant” rise in temperatures since 1995. He said that warming recorded by weather stations was often caused by local factors rather than global change. Is this very prominent professor at the School of Environmental Sciences in East Anglia one of the morons you are talking about?
Well, here's the thing. There are scientists who believe in a young earth. Does finding some people who agree with a point of view, prove it is true ? I don't care where he goes, his opinion of what is 'significant', is his, and he's welcome to it. My point was, if you read a book that's not mass market hysteria on AGW, they will tell you that what the papers claim, is usually an extreme prediction ( I don't think anyone thinks that the seas are going to rise 10m, for example ), and that the theory of AGW is that we're messing with the weather and the result will be more extreme weather. The snow storms you talk about, and the rains in Australia, if anything, are proof of AGW, not proof against it.
Oakman wrote:
In 2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,said that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event” Another one of the morons?
You know, the interesting thing about science, is that it's not religion, and does not claim to be absolute. If you spoke to him today, do you think he'd be saying that it's still a few years away ( which would be a rel
-
Oakman wrote:
Lighten up, Christian. Throwing words around like "morons," and trying to pick a fight over jokes, doesn't become you.
Perhaps. It's usually fat_boy, but I just get sick of deliberate ignorance.
Oakman wrote:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,
Someone seeking a soundbite, not a scientist.
Oakman wrote:
"The Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035." Is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U. N.'s nter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, one of those morons?
That's possible, there's a lot of places where ice is thinning. But, it's a prediction, I'd love to know the context, and if he said it in absolute terms.
Oakman wrote:
A little while ago, Professor Phil Jones, who is at the center of the “Climategate” affair, conceded that there has been no “statistically significant” rise in temperatures since 1995. He said that warming recorded by weather stations was often caused by local factors rather than global change. Is this very prominent professor at the School of Environmental Sciences in East Anglia one of the morons you are talking about?
Well, here's the thing. There are scientists who believe in a young earth. Does finding some people who agree with a point of view, prove it is true ? I don't care where he goes, his opinion of what is 'significant', is his, and he's welcome to it. My point was, if you read a book that's not mass market hysteria on AGW, they will tell you that what the papers claim, is usually an extreme prediction ( I don't think anyone thinks that the seas are going to rise 10m, for example ), and that the theory of AGW is that we're messing with the weather and the result will be more extreme weather. The snow storms you talk about, and the rains in Australia, if anything, are proof of AGW, not proof against it.
Oakman wrote:
In 2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,said that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event” Another one of the morons?
You know, the interesting thing about science, is that it's not religion, and does not claim to be absolute. If you spoke to him today, do you think he'd be saying that it's still a few years away ( which would be a rel
Christian Graus wrote:
Perhaps. It's usually fat_boy, but I just get sick of deliberate ignorance
Why does it always have to be personal insults with you? Isn't it possible to believe differently from you without being either a moron or a deliberate ignoramus?
Christian Graus wrote:
That's possible, there's a lot of places where ice is thinning. But, it's a prediction, I'd love to know the context, and if he said it in absolute terms.
Actually he admitted about a year ago that he made up the prediction. And he admitted that there is no scientific evidence that it will happen, but refused to resign from his position as head of the U.N.'s Climate Committee. That you do not know this suggests that you are not quite as well read as you imply you are. Perhaps reading a couple more books would be in order before criticizing others?
Christian Graus wrote:
or do you think he'd say 'We know a lot more now, and so my views have evolved as our understanding has grown',
What a real scientist said about Viner's prediction recently: "I'd say at some point, say 50 years from now, it might be right. If he said a few years, that was an unwise prediction," ~ Michael Oppenheimer, director of Princeton University's Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy.
Christian Graus wrote:
The question is, what does any of this prove ?
It doesn't have to prove anything Christian, it merely recognizes that the track record of most of the people who are assuring us that the world is about to overheat is abysmal.
Christian Graus wrote:
What you're doing is like church goers who argue against evolution by arguing against Darwin, and not the 200 odd years of scientific progress that has changed and moulded the theory that Darwin originated, but did not set out on stone tablets to be frozen in time. That's what I love about science. It seeks to better itself.
One of the things I have noticed about most of those who have made a living predicting doom by Global Warming is that skeptic has become a perjoritive word. But a skeptic is who one asks for evidence that an assertion is a fact and not a guess or belief. In other words, a scientist. These people in whom you have such faith are not scientists, they are True Believers,
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Perhaps. It's usually fat_boy, but I just get sick of deliberate ignorance
Why does it always have to be personal insults with you? Isn't it possible to believe differently from you without being either a moron or a deliberate ignoramus?
Christian Graus wrote:
That's possible, there's a lot of places where ice is thinning. But, it's a prediction, I'd love to know the context, and if he said it in absolute terms.
Actually he admitted about a year ago that he made up the prediction. And he admitted that there is no scientific evidence that it will happen, but refused to resign from his position as head of the U.N.'s Climate Committee. That you do not know this suggests that you are not quite as well read as you imply you are. Perhaps reading a couple more books would be in order before criticizing others?
Christian Graus wrote:
or do you think he'd say 'We know a lot more now, and so my views have evolved as our understanding has grown',
What a real scientist said about Viner's prediction recently: "I'd say at some point, say 50 years from now, it might be right. If he said a few years, that was an unwise prediction," ~ Michael Oppenheimer, director of Princeton University's Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy.
Christian Graus wrote:
The question is, what does any of this prove ?
It doesn't have to prove anything Christian, it merely recognizes that the track record of most of the people who are assuring us that the world is about to overheat is abysmal.
Christian Graus wrote:
What you're doing is like church goers who argue against evolution by arguing against Darwin, and not the 200 odd years of scientific progress that has changed and moulded the theory that Darwin originated, but did not set out on stone tablets to be frozen in time. That's what I love about science. It seeks to better itself.
One of the things I have noticed about most of those who have made a living predicting doom by Global Warming is that skeptic has become a perjoritive word. But a skeptic is who one asks for evidence that an assertion is a fact and not a guess or belief. In other words, a scientist. These people in whom you have such faith are not scientists, they are True Believers,
Oakman wrote:
Why does it always have to be personal insults with you? Isn't it possible to believe differently from you without being either a moron or a deliberate ignoramus?
I was speaking in general, but the truth is, the way you've treated me in the past makes it hard for me to not react on a personal level. And, it's not a good day for me anyhow, so I'm struggling with being the bigger person.
Oakman wrote:
That you do not know this suggests that you are not quite as well read as you imply you are.
I'n not as obsessive as some. I'm happy to read some books, without tracking every individual's personal life, as if the failings of a human being disprove a body of scientific work.
Oakman wrote:
it merely recognizes that the track record of most of the people who are assuring us that the world is about to overheat is abysmal.
It proves that if you cherry pick, you can find people to criticise, and from that, try to criticise everyone for the sins of the few.
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.
-
Oakman wrote:
Why does it always have to be personal insults with you? Isn't it possible to believe differently from you without being either a moron or a deliberate ignoramus?
I was speaking in general, but the truth is, the way you've treated me in the past makes it hard for me to not react on a personal level. And, it's not a good day for me anyhow, so I'm struggling with being the bigger person.
Oakman wrote:
That you do not know this suggests that you are not quite as well read as you imply you are.
I'n not as obsessive as some. I'm happy to read some books, without tracking every individual's personal life, as if the failings of a human being disprove a body of scientific work.
Oakman wrote:
it merely recognizes that the track record of most of the people who are assuring us that the world is about to overheat is abysmal.
It proves that if you cherry pick, you can find people to criticise, and from that, try to criticise everyone for the sins of the few.
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:
the way you've treated me in the past
"The SoapBox is not for flame wars, personal vendettas, or endless debate about climate change." Seems to me you're violating all three today. If you need to get back at me for some real or imagined slight, call me out in a forum where such is standard fare. (You're welcome to do it in the Back Room I believe, and I am sure CSS would agree with you whole-heartedly about my character and my sins.)
Christian Graus wrote:
It proves that if you cherry pick, you can find people to criticise
Indeed. I did cherry pick. I found quotes from men who are considered the leaders of the Global Alarmist movement. Selecting a back bencher would be too easy. But then again, I note that you don't give me any reasons to doubt my conclusions, you don't cite any facts, you simply attack me on a personal level and do the cybernetic equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly to keep from listening to anything I have to say. Proving, I suppose, that I am foolish to say anything. I'll give you the last word. I am proving that this debate -- started because you took umbrage at a joke -- is not unending. Have a good day.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken