On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:33:44 -0800, Last Post wrote:
On Jan 5, 5:19Â*pm, Roving rabbit wrote:
The debat is over for me because two totally independent data source
are brought into agreement by a factor 0.4. This was claimed in a GRL
paper, and I was able to validate this claim. So I'm convinced that the
authors have the answer in the right ball-park.
• ROTFLMAO
The odds are that you are working with fraudulent data
• To get it straight read:
Message-ID: bc421438-9c9a-420a-8151-
• The AGW alarmist pack presume to be able


control a climate on a planet, spun off from
the Sun and still in the solar system and in


the Sun's control.
So I ask them and you 3 questions:
1- Can you make the wind to blow?
Surely. You appear even more skilled than I.
2- Can you make the rain to fall?
Aye. Just stand downwind from me after a few pints.
3- Can you stop a hurricane?
Might just figure out how to add to the spin at a crucial moment,
enough to send some rain to the Marquesas or Bonaparte's grave
• If the answer to these are no then get the hell


We are currently generating enough power to put anthropogenic
sources into the same order of magnitude as the energy we
receive from Sol.
Whether or not we can do anything about climate change is
the only meaningful question. It is here and now and we
are a significant part of the equation.
My own take on this is that we need to address first and foremost
the toxic effects of our industrial society upon the biology of the planet.
The planet's biota, of which we are part, has survived temperature
and CO2 fluctuations b4 but has no experience with buckyballs or nanobots.
Dhu
out of town before the lynch mob comes
—Â*—
| In real science the burden of proof is always | on the proposer,
never on the sceptics. So far | neither IPCC nor anyone else has
provided one | iota of valid data for global warming nor have | they
provided data that climate change is being | effected by commerce and
industry, and not by | natural phenomena
--
Duncan Patton a Campbell is Dhu