Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Awesome name calling, Cecil! Seeing as how you are now hurling
insults, have you declared defeat? Shame on ya.


The truth is not an insult except to someone who
is denying the truth. Anyone who believes that
my life belongs to him/her is on my $hit list.

Obviously, you're a running dog lacky of the fascistic, corporatist,
military-industrial oligarchy. Otherwise, you wouldn't be trying to lull
the masses into believing the poisonous fumes from your CO2-belching
vehicles are harmless to the environment. What you need is a good
re-education at a good re-education camp, Cecil.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tom Ring wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:


For our apocalyptic hugging crowd inside the beltway, there were no
ice ages that long ago. There was no "that long ago" in the first
place for an earth only 7000 years old. Of course, that could be the
standard plausible deniability of the neo-cannibals at work to escape
blame - Rove is trying to elevate the discussion by blaming Clinton
for those ice ages.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


It was more like 4000 something according to people I am acquanted with
that believe in those fairy tales.

And I won't vote for either of your parties. Both are just as corrupt.
Like you Richard, who vote for a yellow-dog-democrats, I will vote for
anything that has breath that is Libertarian.

tom
K0TAR

Libertarians are just kinder, gentler Anarchists. They're more to be
pitied than scorned.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Richard Clark wrote:

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:21:56 -0500, Tom Ring
wrote:


Like you Richard, who vote for a yellow-dog-democrats, I will vote for
anything that has breath that is Libertarian.


Hi Tom,

You want to look at that sentence again and propose just what it
means? You vote, like me, for yellow-dog-democrats? Or you (in
contrast to me) vote for Libertarians who are like
yellow-dog-democrats? Or you (a yellow-dog-democrat) vote for
Libertarians? You seem to be politically ambivalent. ;-)

Punctuation and grammar matters.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard, he's a Libertarian. You have to expect sentences like
that from Libertarians.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH
(P.S. Cecil is a Libertarian, too.)

Tom Donaly wrote:
Otherwise, you wouldn't be trying to lull
the masses into believing the poisonous fumes from your CO2-belching
vehicles are harmless to the environment.

Didn't say they were harmless, Tom, and CO2 is not poisonous.
I said that global warming has, so far, always corrected itself
without the help of man.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Tom Donaly wrote:

SNIPPED


Richard, he's a Libertarian. You have to expect sentences like
that from Libertarians.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH
(P.S. Cecil is a Libertarian, too.)

Libertarian = Anarchy rules!
Democratic = Tyranny of the majority rules!
Republican = Strong private sector economy rules!
Socialist = Elitist know what's best for you and me.
Green Party = Nature rules, the hell with people.
Conservationist = Dinosaur's rule.

/s/ DD

Dave wrote:
Libertarian = Anarchy rules!

From: http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml

What is a Libertarian?

Libertarians believe that you have the right to live your life as you
wish, without the government interfering -- as long as you don’t violate
the rights of others. Politically, this means Libertarians favor rolling
back the size and cost of government, and eliminating laws that stifle
the economy and control people’s personal choices.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
Awesome name calling, Cecil! Seeing as how you are now hurling
insults, have you declared defeat? Shame on ya.

The truth is not an insult except to someone who
is denying the truth. Anyone who believes that
my life belongs to him/her is on my $hit list.


Okay Cecil. I apologize, for I have upset you, quite a bit it appears.
I bear no ill will, and most certainly I don't want to enforce upon you
my idea of the truth.


I'll quit picking on you now..

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

The "sky is falling folks" also fail to take into account the nutation of
the earth that causes the earth to be tilted towards the sun a bit more...
Kinda like the difference between winter and summer tilt.

It takes one hell of an ego to think that puny man can affect the earths
climate. Notice those that are the loudest voices live packed atop one an
other, smelling bus fumes in big cities. They think the rest of the world is
exactly like there limited universe.

I still await an explanation of how freon, that is heavier than air, manages
to make it to the South pole and finds the magical propert to climb to the
ionisphere and eat ozone.

But as always, there is no money in truth, nor can it stop the evil
industrial military complex...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
om...
Tom Donaly wrote:
Otherwise, you wouldn't be trying to lull the masses into believing the
poisonous fumes from your CO2-belching vehicles are harmless to the
environment.

Didn't say they were harmless, Tom, and CO2 is not poisonous.
I said that global warming has, so far, always corrected itself
without the help of man.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

jawod wrote:
Dave wrote:
Be careful regarding 1750 bce.

That predates the industrial revolution by at least 100 years. This
indicates that natural factors are at work.

Petroleum products date from the 1880s. This indicates that natural
factors are at work.

Automobiles date from the early 1910s. This indicates that natural
factors are at work.

Deforestation dates from the mid 1950s. This indicates that natural
factors are at work.

Several large regional deforestations have taken place over Man's
history. Recall that Lebanon's flag is a cyprus tree...now nearly
desert, Lebanon serves as dramatic evidence of deforestation during the
Bronze and Iron ages. Deforestations occurred in Mayan lands around the
time of Christ.

In the late 1800's, most of Central PA was deforested. Either for
lumber, or for the iron industry. I was told that you could go to the
top of Tussey mountain south of my QTH, and not see a single tree in any
direction. Since the people who were making the charcoal that was used
to make the iron thought that planting new trees wasn't a cost effective
option - if they indeed thought about it at all - they eventually ran
out of fuel.

We still are enjoying the effects. What has grown in the original
lumbers place is nowhere near the quality that existed before. We mostly
grow pulpwood now.

Humans really *do* have an effect on the environment.


The chief difference today is that deforestation occurs all around the
globe more-or-less at once.

The period of 1700 to 1750 is acknowledged as the end of the 'Little
Ice Age',

Yes, and there was a warming period near the end of the Roman
period...your point?

There are so many unknown contributors to the earth warming and
cooling cycles that blaming CO2 and other 'greenhouse gases' for the
major cause is just irresponsible.
Hogwash. The grand majority of scientists working on these issues do
not refute manmade impacts on GW (excepting, of course, those receiving
paychecks from industries primarily responsible for them.) Unknown
factors will always exist, but scientific consensus has been already
been achieved on GW.

IMO, GW = K1*d(solar activity)/dt + K2*d(volcanic activity)/dt +
K3*d(El Nino)/dt + K4*d(La Nina)/dt + K5*d(deforestation)/dt +
K6*d(radio carbon decay)/dt + K7*d(many other factors)/dt + Kn*d(n)/dt
...

What is known is that the earth warms and cools. Why? That is still
open to discovery.

The argument for GW is no longer in dispute within the scientific
community. Cyclicity of global temperature does not negate the argument
that the current run of GW is something new and unprecedented. Right
now, governments are already planning for projected effects.

It's here, it's now, it's WOW.


PS: Most Christian Clergy of major denominations agree that the cosmos
was formed between 15 and 20 billion years ago. The 4004 bce
calculation is incorrect and is the result of poor biblical scholarship.

Ask any Baptist and you'll get the 4004 answer...the "one-second-used-to
be-a-million-years" argument notwithstanding.

Sometimes ya gotta be pretty creative to be always right! My
Grandparents were Baptists, and they were firm believers in that date.
They also believed in biblical support for slavery for that matter. 8^0


Who's gonna tell them they are wrong?


Again,
My understanding of the notion of GW is that human activity is now
PERTURBING the cyclicity that already exists. Pre-existing cyclicity of
global temperature cannot in itself refute the argument for the
existence of GW as a "new" phenomenon. They're intertwined.

That is pretty much correct.


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA

Michael Coslo wrote:
In the late 1800's, most of Central PA was deforested. Either for
lumber, or for the iron industry. I was told that you could go to the
top of Tussey mountain south of my QTH, and not see a single tree in any
direction. Since the people who were making the charcoal that was used
to make the iron thought that planting new trees wasn't a cost effective
option - if they indeed thought about it at all - they eventually ran
out of fuel.

Some sea-going Pacific islanders used up all their trees
and then couldn't build any boats. :-(
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com