jimp wrote:
A lot of the municipal water around
here comes from man made lakes
with people and fish ****ing in them all the time.

Tom Donaly wrote:
If I were you, I'd move.

Or buy a water filter.

Does fish urine increase the conductivity of water?
Might be worth factoring in when doing antenna calculations
for shoreline installations.


Lumpy NØEQ

You played on "The Love Boat"?
Yes. White tux, huge sideburns.

www.LumpyGuitar.com

Bernard Peters wrote:
Leave it to the lower-half of the IQ range to argue that dumping OVER 22
million tons of crap into the atmosphere a day would not have a long term
effect on our planet.

Yes, it is well known scientific fact that the "more than
25 cubic kilometres of rock, ash, and pumice" ejected by
Krakatoa destroyed all life on this planet in 1883. (Compared
to Mother Nature, man is such a piker.)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Bernard Peters wrote:
You can use the same logic when someone ****es in your town's water tank

You are absolutely correct. There would be no
measurable effect.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Bernard Peters wrote:
You can use the same logic when
someone ****es in your town's water
tank

Cecil Moore wrote:
You are absolutely correct. There would be no
measurable effect.

You could probably survive by eating cigarette
butts if you had to. And drink from an aquarium.
For that matter, you would survive if you didn't
have any arms or legs.

Maybe we could just pollute the earth till
we need glasses.


Lumpy

You were the "OPERATION" game voice?
Yes. Take out wrenched ankle.

www.LumpyVoice.com

Cecil Moore wrote in news:vIFZj.5255$nW2.3466
@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com:

Seriously, one can see from the temperature graph
history that the temperature was almost 5 degrees F
hotter 130,000 and 325,000 years ago than it is today.
In fact, close examination of the temperature graph
shows that the *average* temperature peaked 8000
years ago and has been falling ever since.

I think you make the pattern mistake, Cecil. Does the temperature at those
times indicate the present temperature or the future temperatures?

Are there any different conditions between now and then?

How about a little thought experiment.

Assume that we build a CO2 generator
Likewise say a methane generator.

Let us flood the earth's atmosphere with as much of the two gases as earth
life will stand.

What will be the effect?

- 73 d eMike N3LI -

Bernard Peters wrote in
:
eur.antenna:297129

On Thu, 22 May 2008 20:07:06 -1000, Roger wrote:

Sunspot cycle more dud than radiation flood
--
"We are also brainwashing our children on the warming topic. We have
no better example than Al Gore's alarmists and inaccurate movie which
is being
shown in our schools and being hawked by warming activists with little
or no meteorological-climate background," Gray wrote.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5197,23411799-
7583,00.htm
l http://www.firesociety.com/article/24204/

Leave it to the lower-half of the IQ range to argue that dumping OVER
22 million tons of crap into the atmosphere a day would not have a
long term effect on our planet. Lucky for most of us that we'll be
dead shortly (20-40 years) and not have to worry about it.

Oh, your worried about brain-washing your kinds? Your a good parent!

No doubt home schooled to keep that nasty evolutionist crap out of
the little tykes heads too.

Note that the October 23, 4004 BC crowd uses the same tactics to
discredit evolution as they do the heat retentive effects of the so
called Greenhous gases.

I asked for non political reasons, and one of those folk just posted
here that GW believers are Marxists!

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike Coslo wrote:
I think you make the pattern mistake, Cecil. Does the temperature at those
times indicate the present temperature or the future temperatures?

Without exception, every time in the past that the
CO2 levels have reached 280 ppmv, an ice age ensued.
The CO2 levels are higher than that today. It would
take a miracle to fend off the next ice age cycle.
I don't believe in miracles.

If man can indeed cause global warming, it will result
in a delay in glaciers covering most of North America
for the Nth time. That is a good thing. The scientists
who feared global cooling in the '70's were right.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
36...
Bernard Peters wrote in
:
eur.antenna:297129

On Thu, 22 May 2008 20:07:06 -1000, Roger wrote:

Sunspot cycle more dud than radiation flood
--
"We are also brainwashing our children on the warming topic. We have
no better example than Al Gore's alarmists and inaccurate movie which
is being
shown in our schools and being hawked by warming activists with little
or no meteorological-climate background," Gray wrote.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5197,23411799-
7583,00.htm
l http://www.firesociety.com/article/24204/

Leave it to the lower-half of the IQ range to argue that dumping OVER
22 million tons of crap into the atmosphere a day would not have a
long term effect on our planet. Lucky for most of us that we'll be
dead shortly (20-40 years) and not have to worry about it.

Oh, your worried about brain-washing your kinds? Your a good parent!

No doubt home schooled to keep that nasty evolutionist crap out of
the little tykes heads too.

Note that the October 23, 4004 BC crowd uses the same tactics to
discredit evolution as they do the heat retentive effects of the so
called Greenhous gases.

I asked for non political reasons, and one of those folk just posted
here that GW believers are Marxists!

if it weren't for politicians who are beholden to extreme environmentalists
who want to destroy the capitalist economic system and throw us back to
feudalism there would be no 'global warming crisis'. Its the damn hippy
culture of the 60's grown up and with money who have bought off enough votes
to keep this topic in the news who are to fault. and by using short term
data that isn't correlated with long term trends they can make the natural
short term fluctuations in temperatures look like catastrophes in
progress... my first statistics course professor said it best... "You can
prove anything with statistics." Just pick your data source, throw out the
outliers, apply the analysis that gives you the answer you want, and voila,
global warming, huge storms, and Florida sinks into the ocean. Where in the
bigger picture the temperature has gone down the last couple years, ocean
levels are falling and predicted to fall further, and one good volcano could
throw us into another ice age, then we'll all be begging for more greenhouse
gasses!

Cecil Moore wrote in
:

If man can indeed cause global warming, it will result
in a delay in glaciers covering most of North America
for the Nth time. That is a good thing. The scientists
who feared global cooling in the '70's were right.

Okay, just so I'm sure, you say that the pattern always repeats? And will
always repeat?

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Dave wrote:
I asked for non political reasons, and one of those folk just
posted here that GW believers are Marxists!

if it weren't for politicians who are beholden to extreme
environmentalists who want to destroy the capitalist economic
system and throw us back to feudalism there would be no 'global
warming crisis'. Its the damn hippy culture of the 60's grown up
and with money who have bought off enough votes to keep this
topic in the news who are to fault.

That would be really funny if it were not so scary. Let's hope that
you have no influence outside of your backyard!

SNIP

So you can't trust statistics - wow that's news. Better then to go
in for inane political mud slinging. You can always tell a dead
argument by the level on insults flying around. Insults over
evidence and an informed mind every time!

--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Wymsey - Ten years Old!
www.wymsey.co.uk