Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#3941
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
what's funny is the libs had no problem with gore asking for point
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
#3942
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
what's funny is the libs had no problem with gore asking for point
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
#3943
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
what's funny is the libs had no problem with gore asking for point
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
recounts... when bush asked for a statewide recount he was "stealing" the
election...
"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqm2nephikjf28@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:boe65n$i0q$19@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <boci0401rri@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > >> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
> results
> > >of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>
> > >
> > >Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!
> > >
> > >The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to
> recout
> > >three heavily Democratic counties.
> >
> > FL law allowed for a candidate to ask for a recount in specific
counties.
>
> No one minded Gore asking for a recount, he had that right. He did not
have
> the right to insist on recount after recount until he could find one that
> favored him.
> Had he bowed out gracefully after the first recount he would have had an
> excellent chance of beating Bush in 2004, way he went on though he
destroyed
> any chance he ever had at winning the Presidency. Sort of like the way you
> would do better in debates if you quit after the first reply instead of
> digging yourself in deeper with every lie you post.
>
> >
> >
> > >Worse, with a perfectly straight face
> > >they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
> > >remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of
Chicago
> in
> > >the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a
> much
> > >closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
> > >Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice,
dead
> > >people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago
> saying
> > >"vote early, vote often!"
> >
> > The US constitution provides that a person's transgressions do not
extend
> to
> > their children. Guess that puts you on the wrong side of the
> constitution.
>
> Constitution does not always affect public perception. If you wish to be
> seen as honest you find someone publicly recognized as honest.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what
he
> > >did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only
recently
> > >become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
> > >since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality
> was
> > >to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!
> > >
> > >
>
>
#3944
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:30:25 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
#3945
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:30:25 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
#3946
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:30:25 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
wrote:
>In article <3FAC2B7F.579695AE@kinez.net>, Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Science tells up CO2 absorbs heat, science tells us the earth is warming,
>>> science tells us CO2 has increased along with temperature, science tells us
>>> human activities produce CO2.
>>
>> Soil absorbs heat. Air absorbs heat. Water absorbs heat. Just making
>> a statement like "CO2 absorbs heat" tells us nothing.
>
>What parker should have wrote, is that CO2 acts to retain heat. It's
>a slight, but important difference.
What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Worse, computer models divide the globe into discrete sections and
none of these sections can accurately account for cloud cover.
As a result, all models treat cloud cover as a parameterized input.
That is, he who wishes to model a prediction just adds in the cloud
cover affect just as he wishes.
#3947
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"OK, but would you then agree that a government that tries to take away
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
#3948
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"OK, but would you then agree that a government that tries to take away
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
#3949
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"OK, but would you then agree that a government that tries to take away
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
women's right to choose is being fascist?"
Jesus, a woman also doesn't have the right to attempt suicide (yes,
attempted suicide is illegal). Personally, I feel that abortion is
premeditated murder; my opinion has nothing to do with a relegious stance.
I also don't care if abortion is legal or not. I do think it's funny that
libs are pro-baby-murder but anti death penalty. Of course, it's also funny
that anti-baby-murder folks are also pro death penalty. I like the military
motto of "kill them all, let god sort them out"
#3950
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
In article <oonoqv0fai5j5m1f2eh1jsmlc0ccdb0jkk@4ax.com>, Matt Osborn wrote:
> What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
> cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
> offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Computer models have been misused in this topic. The basic problem
with them is that they are pre-programed with the assumption that
the corrolation seen in some data is causation. Right then and there
what ever the computer model spits out is but a *PREDICTION*.
There are two ways to test these predictions. One, see if they
can predict the future. Run them, then wait and see if the future
matches. Two, run them given the data to some past date. See if they
predict what occured after that date.
To the best of my knowledge, the computer climate models continue
to fail these real world tests. Therefore, they are not something
to base policy on.
Trouble is, too many people think that just because it came out of a
computer that makes it accurate and correct.
> What all the computer models in the world miss is the effects of cloud
> cover. It isn't certain if the heat retained because of clouds
> offsets the heat reflected because of clouds.
Computer models have been misused in this topic. The basic problem
with them is that they are pre-programed with the assumption that
the corrolation seen in some data is causation. Right then and there
what ever the computer model spits out is but a *PREDICTION*.
There are two ways to test these predictions. One, see if they
can predict the future. Run them, then wait and see if the future
matches. Two, run them given the data to some past date. See if they
predict what occured after that date.
To the best of my knowledge, the computer climate models continue
to fail these real world tests. Therefore, they are not something
to base policy on.
Trouble is, too many people think that just because it came out of a
computer that makes it accurate and correct.