Climate Scientists vindicated

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Jim S, Mar 31, 2010.

  1. Jim S

    Jim S Guest

    They would say that wouldn't they?
    How else could they explain all the wasted money?
     
    Jim S, Mar 31, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jim S

    richard Guest

    Don't mean squat. Since the beginning of man, well after the "ice age", the
    global temperatures have remained within a few degrees.

    If their evidence is the fact that ocean waters seem to rise over the
    years, that is bullshit. The waters only appear to rise because over a few
    hundred years, the water has eroded the land and encroached on what was
    once land. There is already evidence supporting that theory. With ancient
    moorings being buried by water when they were built on dry land.

    Don't have any other job and need one? Become a climate scientoligist.
     
    richard, Mar 31, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. I tolja punk ass bitches that the data was worthy.

    THis proves it:
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125378375

    "The House of Commons' Science and Technology Committee said Wednesday that
    they'd seen no evidence to support charges that
    the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit or its director, Phil
    Jones, had tampered with data or perverted the peer
    review process to exaggerate the threat of global warming  two of the most
    serious criticisms levied against the climatologist and
    his colleagues."

    --
    http://www.care2.com/click-to-donate/wolves/
    Proof of Americas 3rd world status:
    http://www.ramusa.org/
    Cash for *who*?
    http://www.bartcop.com/list-the-facts.htm
    http://www.pavlovianobeisance.com/
     
    §ñühw¤£f, Mar 31, 2010
    #3
  4. Jim S

    Jordon Guest

    Richard the climatologist speaks.
     
    Jordon, Mar 31, 2010
    #4
  5. Jim S

    Mike Yetto Guest

    Are you actually *trying* to imply that the beginning of man was
    after the ice age (which one?) or is this just an artifact of
    your command of the language?

    Recent studies indicate the the Incas were able to spread their
    control and influence due to a previous global warming trend that
    afforded them more land at higher elevations in order to feed a
    larger population. That doesn't fit with your steady state
    temperature theory. For that matter, the ice ages blow that
    theory out of the water as well.
    Yes indeed. That once costal lands are now under water is strong
    evidence that oceans never rise. I guess you're correct and
    rising water is only an optical illusion.
    Just like L. Ron Weatherman?

    Mike "I blame David Copperfield" Yetto
     
    Mike Yetto, Mar 31, 2010
    #5
  6. Jim S

    Whiskers Guest

    [...]
    So, the water has eroded the land, but the ancient moorings that were on
    that land that has been eroded and is thus no longer there, somehow manage
    to survive. Floating in the air perhaps? One wonders that the fishermen
    who frequent the area around the Dogger Bank never seem to collide with
    the trees that must still be above the sea around there even though the
    land has 'eroded' so far that boats can sail right over it.
     
    Whiskers, Apr 1, 2010
    #6
  7. Jim S

    Parko Guest

    Pardon??? I'd rather be a cunning linguist!
     
    Parko, Apr 1, 2010
    #7
  8. Jim S

    Jordon Guest

    Good catch.
     
    Jordon, Apr 1, 2010
    #8
  9. Jim S

    Ferd.Berfle Guest

    Yep. This was just the pre election smoke screen.

    ".........Lawmakers stressed that their report which was written after only
    a single day of oral testimony did not cover all the issues and would not be
    as in-depth as the two other inquiries into the e-mail scandal that are
    still spending.

    Willis said the lawmakers had been in a rush to publish something before
    Britain's next national election, which is widely expected in just over a
    month's time.

    "Clearly we would have liked to spend more time of this," he said, before
    adding jokingly: "We had to get something out before we were sent packing."
    ......."
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/30/tech/main6347584.shtml
     
    Ferd.Berfle, Apr 1, 2010
    #9
  10. Jim S

    Jordon Guest

    Did they find the missing link? Where does 155,000 come from?
    Primitive Homo sapiens go back 500,000. Anatomically modern
    Homo sapiens go back 200,000.

    Homo neanderthalensis was long thought to be a completely
    separate species but I've read that recently, some studies
    claim that they may have mixed with Homo sapiens before
    they died out (or were absorbed). They go back 2 million
    years.
     
    Jordon, Apr 1, 2010
    #10
  11. Jim S

    Jordon Guest

    He's not missing, but his village is looking for him.
     
    Jordon, Apr 1, 2010
    #11
  12. Jim S

    Mike Yetto Guest

    Every time one is found it creates two new gaps in the fossil
    record. We'll never get anywhere that way.

    Mike "following the non-sequitor paradigm" Yetto
     
    Mike Yetto, Apr 1, 2010
    #12
  13. Jim S

    Mike Yetto Guest

    <utter nonsence snipped>

    Your comments are too inane to let pass, but too ridiculous to
    spend any time on.


    Mike "such a quandary" Yetto
     
    Mike Yetto, Apr 2, 2010
    #13
  14. Jim S

    chuckcar Guest

    It's nonsence anyways. Evolution doesn't work by such leaps. It works by
    a slight changes causing slight advantages compounded over and over.
     
    chuckcar, Apr 3, 2010
    #14
  15. Jim S

    Aardvark Guest

    WTF?????
     
    Aardvark, Apr 3, 2010
    #15
  16. Jim S

    Mike Yetto Guest

    If you stand on a chair the whoosh bird will have to fly higher
    to go over your head.

    Mike "for you, a step ladder" Yetto
     
    Mike Yetto, Apr 3, 2010
    #16
  17. Jim S

    chuckcar Guest

    Uh. huh. Riight. The lady that wants to be killed by the laptop in her
    front seat has a Phd in biology. Go on, pull the other one.
     
    chuckcar, Apr 3, 2010
    #17
  18. Jim S

    chuckcar Guest

    I *know* what Brownian motion is.
    Required you to be registered.
    I see absolutely no mention of evolution in what I read of the above
    links.
    Mutation rates in genetics have *absolutely* no relevance to the
    way evolution works. The former is merely just a crap shoot to see
    what sort of wierdness you can get.

    Mutation is a much misused word when you're talking about evolution.
    Would you consider someone with red hair and no freckles amutant?
    How about someone with green eyes and black hair? Someone whose finger
    is 2mm longer than his fathers?
     
    chuckcar, Apr 3, 2010
    #18
  19. Jim S

    Mike Yetto Guest

    Seriously, adjust your meds.

    Mike "either more or less" Yetto
     
    Mike Yetto, Apr 3, 2010
    #19
  20. Jim S

    chuckcar Guest

    You *actually* think that bombarding fruit flies with xrays has *any*
    relevance to the way evolution works in the natural world? Do you know
    *why* geneticists used to do it?
     
    chuckcar, Apr 4, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.