Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#2881
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4bt$kba$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <bnp3rl0vi8@enews3.newsguy.com>,
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote:
>
> Here's one of the fools:
We know your here Lloyd, you don't need to introduce yourself every time you
post.
>
> >Very well stated BrentP, bravo!
> >
> >These people are Socialists and crypto-Communists striving to control the
> >masses via the old Leninist/Stalinist tactic of "The Big Lie". They'll
use
> >any fable, concocted theory, etc. for alarmist purposes in an attempt to
> >gain political control.
> >
> >The bottom line is, CO2 is a non-poisonous, life-sustaining gas. These
> >morons first sought control through the CO/NOx scares of the 60's & 70's.
> >When industry brought those toxic gasses under control quite easily, they
> >had to concoct something like the "global warming" CO2 scare. CO2
emissions
> >are virtually impossible to reduce without sending everyone back into the
> >caves, or better for the leftists, into government mandated employment,
> >housing and transportation schemes. It provides the leftists an excuse
for
> >wealth, land & property confiscation and is nothing more than a
> >"communism-masquerading-as-green" agenda. All these rants are
> >paint-by-numbers recitations from the Socialist/Green playbook and the
> >sooner we all see through the con job the better we'll all be. (And to
think
> >I used to be a Liberal Democrat!)
> >
> >
> >> Global warming theory is being used for a political agenda because it
> >allows for _control_ of the population, control of economies, central
> >control by self appointed elites. It allows them to micro manage
everyone's
> >life for the good of the planet. Meanwhile they get to continue living
the
> >way they want. Note how dr. parker screams about putting too much CO2
into
> >the air yet drives a mercedes benz. This is rather typical. There'd be
alot
> >more credibility if drove an insight or a metro.
> >>
> >> Then there are all the environmental policies designed to constrain
> >developed western nations while allowing 'developing' nations to make all
> >the same mistakes that were made in the west. We know better now. If it
were
> >about the environment the policies would not be structured this way.
> >Needless harm to the environment simply would not be allowed. <
> >
> >
#2882
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:eCbob.146$Eu7.2109481@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Looks like Lloyd replied to every other post except this one. I guess that
> when he shouts "Learn some science", our educator didn't mean from
himself.
> Interesting how he is vocal in criticizing other opinions as long as they
> don't come from other scientists, and equally has no intention in backing
up
> what he believes himself.
Lloyd tries hard to never post facts, because then it is harder for him to
lie his way out of it. Of course when confronted with facts he can't lie his
way around he simply doesn't respond.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
>
> "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
> news:d9Ynb.5397$QB7.49790167@news-text.cableinet.net...
> : Lloyd, what's your opinion on the sunspot theory ? This has been a long
> and
> : boring thread, but if you can give us an intelligent critique on it, I
for
> : one would be genuinely interested.
> :
> : Dave Milne, Scotland
> : '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
> :
> : "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
> : news:3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org...
> : : And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> : :
> : : http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> :
> :
>
>
#2883
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:eCbob.146$Eu7.2109481@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Looks like Lloyd replied to every other post except this one. I guess that
> when he shouts "Learn some science", our educator didn't mean from
himself.
> Interesting how he is vocal in criticizing other opinions as long as they
> don't come from other scientists, and equally has no intention in backing
up
> what he believes himself.
Lloyd tries hard to never post facts, because then it is harder for him to
lie his way out of it. Of course when confronted with facts he can't lie his
way around he simply doesn't respond.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
>
> "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
> news:d9Ynb.5397$QB7.49790167@news-text.cableinet.net...
> : Lloyd, what's your opinion on the sunspot theory ? This has been a long
> and
> : boring thread, but if you can give us an intelligent critique on it, I
for
> : one would be genuinely interested.
> :
> : Dave Milne, Scotland
> : '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
> :
> : "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
> : news:3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org...
> : : And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> : :
> : : http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> :
> :
>
>
#2884
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:eCbob.146$Eu7.2109481@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Looks like Lloyd replied to every other post except this one. I guess that
> when he shouts "Learn some science", our educator didn't mean from
himself.
> Interesting how he is vocal in criticizing other opinions as long as they
> don't come from other scientists, and equally has no intention in backing
up
> what he believes himself.
Lloyd tries hard to never post facts, because then it is harder for him to
lie his way out of it. Of course when confronted with facts he can't lie his
way around he simply doesn't respond.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
>
> "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
> news:d9Ynb.5397$QB7.49790167@news-text.cableinet.net...
> : Lloyd, what's your opinion on the sunspot theory ? This has been a long
> and
> : boring thread, but if you can give us an intelligent critique on it, I
for
> : one would be genuinely interested.
> :
> : Dave Milne, Scotland
> : '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
> :
> : "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
> : news:3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org...
> : : And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> : :
> : : http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> :
> :
>
>
#2885
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4e8$kba$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org>,
> "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >Gerald G. McGeorge wrote:
>
> More BS:
Yep, that's what every post you make is.
>
> >> Bravo!
> >>
> >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3F4ECCD1.AB1C303@mindspring.com...
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Perhaps if you knew some science, we could have an intelligent
> >>>
> >> discussion
> >>
> >>>>about science.
> >>>
> >>>Explain to me the methods being used to measure the average global
> >>>temperature that are both precise enough and consistent enough to
> >>>separate a 0.4 degree C temperature rise out of the normal background
> >>>variation over the past 1000 years. Explain to me any computer model
> >>>that can predict 1 degree C average global temperature rises with any
> >>>certainty when they can't even predict tomorrow's temperatures with 3
> >>>degrees on a consistent basis.
> >>>
> >>>I assume you don't know any scientist who adjust their data to fit
their
> >>>preconceived notions.
> >>>
> >>>Weren't those cold fusion guys "scientist"? Heck I think they were even
> >>>honest scientist.
> >>>
> >>>Do you honestly think the Earth's environment has ever been static and
> >>>unchanging? Can you say with any certainty that global warming is worse
> >>>than the environmental changes that would occur in its absence?
> >>>
> >>>Literally billions of tons of carbon have been effectively removed from
> >>>the atmosphere over the last few billion years. At some point, might me
> >>>have too little CO2?
> >>>
> >>>History is full of widely accepted theories that turned out to be
wrong.
> >>>Why are you so sure that Global Warming isn't one of these?
> >>>
> >>>I assume you believe that all scientist and government agency are
> >>>completely honest and that they would never jump on a popular bandwagon
> >>>as means of securing funding to support their careers/agencies? It has
> >>>been my experience that people who say things are OK tend not to secure
> >>>funding and soon need to find something else to do.
> >>>
> >>>Even if you are 100% right about global warming, might not the fixes be
> >>>worse than doing nothing?
> >>>
> >>>Ed
> >>>
> >>>None of us is as dumb as all of us
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> >
> >http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> >
> >They still can't shake the ingrained notion that man has caused this,
> >but they'll come around eventually and likely add new "causes" as well.
> > Trouble is, it is very hard to separate causes from correlation,
> >especially in areas like this where it is pretty hard to run controlled
> >experiments. Simple observation of data can easily lead to such
> >confusion. I suspect many other things can be found to correlate with
> >global climate changes, but I'll also bet that few of them are causes.
> >
> >
> >Matt
> >
#2886
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4e8$kba$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org>,
> "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >Gerald G. McGeorge wrote:
>
> More BS:
Yep, that's what every post you make is.
>
> >> Bravo!
> >>
> >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3F4ECCD1.AB1C303@mindspring.com...
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Perhaps if you knew some science, we could have an intelligent
> >>>
> >> discussion
> >>
> >>>>about science.
> >>>
> >>>Explain to me the methods being used to measure the average global
> >>>temperature that are both precise enough and consistent enough to
> >>>separate a 0.4 degree C temperature rise out of the normal background
> >>>variation over the past 1000 years. Explain to me any computer model
> >>>that can predict 1 degree C average global temperature rises with any
> >>>certainty when they can't even predict tomorrow's temperatures with 3
> >>>degrees on a consistent basis.
> >>>
> >>>I assume you don't know any scientist who adjust their data to fit
their
> >>>preconceived notions.
> >>>
> >>>Weren't those cold fusion guys "scientist"? Heck I think they were even
> >>>honest scientist.
> >>>
> >>>Do you honestly think the Earth's environment has ever been static and
> >>>unchanging? Can you say with any certainty that global warming is worse
> >>>than the environmental changes that would occur in its absence?
> >>>
> >>>Literally billions of tons of carbon have been effectively removed from
> >>>the atmosphere over the last few billion years. At some point, might me
> >>>have too little CO2?
> >>>
> >>>History is full of widely accepted theories that turned out to be
wrong.
> >>>Why are you so sure that Global Warming isn't one of these?
> >>>
> >>>I assume you believe that all scientist and government agency are
> >>>completely honest and that they would never jump on a popular bandwagon
> >>>as means of securing funding to support their careers/agencies? It has
> >>>been my experience that people who say things are OK tend not to secure
> >>>funding and soon need to find something else to do.
> >>>
> >>>Even if you are 100% right about global warming, might not the fixes be
> >>>worse than doing nothing?
> >>>
> >>>Ed
> >>>
> >>>None of us is as dumb as all of us
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> >
> >http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> >
> >They still can't shake the ingrained notion that man has caused this,
> >but they'll come around eventually and likely add new "causes" as well.
> > Trouble is, it is very hard to separate causes from correlation,
> >especially in areas like this where it is pretty hard to run controlled
> >experiments. Simple observation of data can easily lead to such
> >confusion. I suspect many other things can be found to correlate with
> >global climate changes, but I'll also bet that few of them are causes.
> >
> >
> >Matt
> >
#2887
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4e8$kba$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <3FA03D91.3080807@computer.org>,
> "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >Gerald G. McGeorge wrote:
>
> More BS:
Yep, that's what every post you make is.
>
> >> Bravo!
> >>
> >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3F4ECCD1.AB1C303@mindspring.com...
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Perhaps if you knew some science, we could have an intelligent
> >>>
> >> discussion
> >>
> >>>>about science.
> >>>
> >>>Explain to me the methods being used to measure the average global
> >>>temperature that are both precise enough and consistent enough to
> >>>separate a 0.4 degree C temperature rise out of the normal background
> >>>variation over the past 1000 years. Explain to me any computer model
> >>>that can predict 1 degree C average global temperature rises with any
> >>>certainty when they can't even predict tomorrow's temperatures with 3
> >>>degrees on a consistent basis.
> >>>
> >>>I assume you don't know any scientist who adjust their data to fit
their
> >>>preconceived notions.
> >>>
> >>>Weren't those cold fusion guys "scientist"? Heck I think they were even
> >>>honest scientist.
> >>>
> >>>Do you honestly think the Earth's environment has ever been static and
> >>>unchanging? Can you say with any certainty that global warming is worse
> >>>than the environmental changes that would occur in its absence?
> >>>
> >>>Literally billions of tons of carbon have been effectively removed from
> >>>the atmosphere over the last few billion years. At some point, might me
> >>>have too little CO2?
> >>>
> >>>History is full of widely accepted theories that turned out to be
wrong.
> >>>Why are you so sure that Global Warming isn't one of these?
> >>>
> >>>I assume you believe that all scientist and government agency are
> >>>completely honest and that they would never jump on a popular bandwagon
> >>>as means of securing funding to support their careers/agencies? It has
> >>>been my experience that people who say things are OK tend not to secure
> >>>funding and soon need to find something else to do.
> >>>
> >>>Even if you are 100% right about global warming, might not the fixes be
> >>>worse than doing nothing?
> >>>
> >>>Ed
> >>>
> >>>None of us is as dumb as all of us
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >And now another theory as to possible causation for global warming:
> >
> >http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
> >
> >They still can't shake the ingrained notion that man has caused this,
> >but they'll come around eventually and likely add new "causes" as well.
> > Trouble is, it is very hard to separate causes from correlation,
> >especially in areas like this where it is pretty hard to run controlled
> >experiments. Simple observation of data can easily lead to such
> >confusion. I suspect many other things can be found to correlate with
> >global climate changes, but I'll also bet that few of them are causes.
> >
> >
> >Matt
> >
#2888
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4m1$kba$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vq0vqunbmkhee3@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
>
> Another fool proudly showing off his ignorance:
Yes, your very proud of your foolish ideas, lets see you actually counter it
with some facts. You can't do it.
>
> >"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:b__nb.45699$ao4.111788@attbi_s51...
> >> In article <vq0qtnc1m8gd45@corp.supernews.com>, Douglas A. Shrader
wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:bnnein02qe3@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >> >> Thanks for posting the link & text, Doug. Indeed, back in the
mid-70's
> >> >> theses same looney greens took all the "global cooling" crap just as
> >> >> seriously as they do all the hand wringing carbon dioxide theories
now.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Your welcome. I remember it very well myself. I've mentioned it to
Lloyd
> >> > before, he always said I was lying, there was no proof any scientist
had
> >> > made such a claim.
> >> > This article proves LP wrong again, it names names, even National
> >Academy of
> >> > Sciences and NOAA. And as expected, not a word From Lloyd about it.
He
> >must
> >> > really hate being proven wrong on every statement he makes. ;-)
> >>
> >> I remember "global cooling" too. Got that in early grade school in the
> >> late 1970s. Much like they teach kids "global warming" today. But cites
> >> on the net were always few and far between due it being well prior to
> >> 1995.
> >
> >Yep, they cried doom until it started warming up, then switched to global
> >warming and started crying doom again. I remember winters here as a kid,
> >temperatures normally 0 or below, snow on the ground for 60 days or more
> >without melting, just piling up deeper and deeper, always a fight to keep
> >the road here open to get to town.
> >We don't have weather like that now, but it will return soon, I'll bet on
> >that. Just a question of when. I like it better now, temperature around
30
> >and snowfall melts off in a few days to a week.
> >
> >
#2889
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4m1$kba$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vq0vqunbmkhee3@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
>
> Another fool proudly showing off his ignorance:
Yes, your very proud of your foolish ideas, lets see you actually counter it
with some facts. You can't do it.
>
> >"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:b__nb.45699$ao4.111788@attbi_s51...
> >> In article <vq0qtnc1m8gd45@corp.supernews.com>, Douglas A. Shrader
wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:bnnein02qe3@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >> >> Thanks for posting the link & text, Doug. Indeed, back in the
mid-70's
> >> >> theses same looney greens took all the "global cooling" crap just as
> >> >> seriously as they do all the hand wringing carbon dioxide theories
now.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Your welcome. I remember it very well myself. I've mentioned it to
Lloyd
> >> > before, he always said I was lying, there was no proof any scientist
had
> >> > made such a claim.
> >> > This article proves LP wrong again, it names names, even National
> >Academy of
> >> > Sciences and NOAA. And as expected, not a word From Lloyd about it.
He
> >must
> >> > really hate being proven wrong on every statement he makes. ;-)
> >>
> >> I remember "global cooling" too. Got that in early grade school in the
> >> late 1970s. Much like they teach kids "global warming" today. But cites
> >> on the net were always few and far between due it being well prior to
> >> 1995.
> >
> >Yep, they cried doom until it started warming up, then switched to global
> >warming and started crying doom again. I remember winters here as a kid,
> >temperatures normally 0 or below, snow on the ground for 60 days or more
> >without melting, just piling up deeper and deeper, always a fight to keep
> >the road here open to get to town.
> >We don't have weather like that now, but it will return soon, I'll bet on
> >that. Just a question of when. I like it better now, temperature around
30
> >and snowfall melts off in a few days to a week.
> >
> >
#2890
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bnr4m1$kba$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vq0vqunbmkhee3@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
>
> Another fool proudly showing off his ignorance:
Yes, your very proud of your foolish ideas, lets see you actually counter it
with some facts. You can't do it.
>
> >"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:b__nb.45699$ao4.111788@attbi_s51...
> >> In article <vq0qtnc1m8gd45@corp.supernews.com>, Douglas A. Shrader
wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:bnnein02qe3@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >> >> Thanks for posting the link & text, Doug. Indeed, back in the
mid-70's
> >> >> theses same looney greens took all the "global cooling" crap just as
> >> >> seriously as they do all the hand wringing carbon dioxide theories
now.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Your welcome. I remember it very well myself. I've mentioned it to
Lloyd
> >> > before, he always said I was lying, there was no proof any scientist
had
> >> > made such a claim.
> >> > This article proves LP wrong again, it names names, even National
> >Academy of
> >> > Sciences and NOAA. And as expected, not a word From Lloyd about it.
He
> >must
> >> > really hate being proven wrong on every statement he makes. ;-)
> >>
> >> I remember "global cooling" too. Got that in early grade school in the
> >> late 1970s. Much like they teach kids "global warming" today. But cites
> >> on the net were always few and far between due it being well prior to
> >> 1995.
> >
> >Yep, they cried doom until it started warming up, then switched to global
> >warming and started crying doom again. I remember winters here as a kid,
> >temperatures normally 0 or below, snow on the ground for 60 days or more
> >without melting, just piling up deeper and deeper, always a fight to keep
> >the road here open to get to town.
> >We don't have weather like that now, but it will return soon, I'll bet on
> >that. Just a question of when. I like it better now, temperature around
30
> >and snowfall melts off in a few days to a week.
> >
> >