Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#4232
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
I tried to not to answer these grossly off-topic discussions, but I
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
#4233
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
I tried to not to answer these grossly off-topic discussions, but I
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
#4234
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
I tried to not to answer these grossly off-topic discussions, but I
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
couldn't resist <sigh> making just one point. What with the hoopla about
global warming several years back when the Kyoto accords were being
pushed (by nations that hadn't signed them, oddly), I wanted to see just
how bad things were. We have a US weather station in Williamsport that
has continuously recorded data for over 100 years, so I thought I'd
download that for study. Of course, there's a lot of fluctuation, but if
you plot a linear trend line to the data for the last 103 years you find
the average annual temperature here has dropped by about 0.5F, not
increased. Hmmm...where is the warming data? Is that only being
collected in large, growing cities and not rural areas? Secondly, I
plotted a 5 year moving average just to see what might show up and there
is a remarkable cycle that appears, lasting about 11 years or so. Just
the same as the solar cyles for sunspots. Curious. Maybe we're just
different from the rest of the world out here in the country, but
hmmm....
=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
> st3ph3nm wrote:
> > DTJ <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<gu5tqvcuqj5rf4n4bie9qjjfd90nd2t66c@4ax.com>. ..
> >
> >>On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:49:07 GMT, tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>>We know better now. When I see a proposed solution that really does
> >>>lower global CO2 output, I can get behind it. Until then, all I see
> >>>is a bunch of people who feel guilty and/or want to punish the USA and
> >>>are using this topic as their tool to do so.
> >>
> >>You hit the nail on the head. The left has a single purpose - punish
> >>those in the United States by redistributing our wealth to others.
> >
> >
> > I would disagree. Coming from a (well, for you guys, fairly
> > extremely) leftist background (my Dad was a member of the Labour party
> > here back when that's what it was) that's not surprising, though I
> > guess. I don't think the US needs to be punished for being rich. I'm
> > not jealous of your lifestyle, or your political system. Having said
> > that, IIRC, something like 22% of our (human caused) greenhouse gas
> > emissions come from a country that has 7% of the worlds population.
> > Surely if that 7% can dramatically reduce the amount it's putting out,
> > it's going to have a significant impact on overall amounts? And
> > there's no reason not to reduce output of these gases, when in most
> > cases it can be done by being more efficient - which I would have
> > thought guys on the right would be into. I would hope that in any
> > Western country, we could lead the way, develop the technologies, and
> > sell them on to the developing markets. I wish Australia hadn't
> > followed the US lead on Kyoto, but there you go.
>
> Only if the theory of global warming is correct. I don't believe it is
> and none of us will likely live long enough to ever find out. The earth
> has been undergoing massive changes in climate for some time, and I
> don't expect that to stop simply because we started recording it better.
>
> Matt
#4235
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misi
In article <vqvr5ddpte2daf@corp.supernews.com>, "fbloogyudsr"
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
#4236
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misi
In article <vqvr5ddpte2daf@corp.supernews.com>, "fbloogyudsr"
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
#4237
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misi
In article <vqvr5ddpte2daf@corp.supernews.com>, "fbloogyudsr"
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
<fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> writes:
>Haven't you noticed? Lloyd posts from his university account, when he
>should be in the classroom filling minds with drivel.
>
>Floyd
So if he's spending more time posting his crap than "teaching," we can be
hopeful the students at Emory will actually learn something worthwhile...
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
#4238
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Mon, 10 Nov 03 13:13:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.
#4239
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Mon, 10 Nov 03 13:13:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.
#4240
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Mon, 10 Nov 03 13:13:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.
wrote:
>If you think GW isn't real, then you need to learn what "proof" means.
What an idiotic statement.
First, is global warming real?
Second, what is the cause?
You have yet to prove the first, yet are already assuming that number
2 is the United States.