Warming 99.999999999999999999999999999999% Certain!
 

February 13, 2004

David Ball wrote:


You're not the only ones who have noticed this. Mr. Elifritz
has a bad habit of only reading what he wants to and selectively
snipping the rest.

No, I read everything, I just snip what I am not replying to.

I'm not sure what Roger is trying to prove.

We aren't trying to 'prove' anything, Science is demonstrative, and the evidence clearly
demonstrates what hydrocarbon combustion is doing to this planet.

[snip nonsense, no need to reply to it]

The public needs honest open
discussion on this subject, not the musings of a few extremists who
are either trying to hide the truth or blow it out of all proportion.

No, the 'planet' needs solutions, in lieu of discussion, which you decline to supply.

Thomas Lee Elifiritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Warming 99.999999999999999999999999999999% Certain!
 

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:54:22 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
wrote:

February 13, 2004

David Ball wrote:


You're not the only ones who have noticed this. Mr. Elifritz
has a bad habit of only reading what he wants to and selectively
snipping the rest.

No, I read everything, I just snip what I am not replying to.

I wish that were true, but it isn't.


I'm not sure what Roger is trying to prove.

We aren't trying to 'prove' anything, Science is demonstrative, and the evidence clearly
demonstrates what hydrocarbon combustion is doing to this planet.

Not the way Roger is doing it.


[snip nonsense, no need to reply to it]

The public needs honest open
discussion on this subject, not the musings of a few extremists who
are either trying to hide the truth or blow it out of all proportion.

No, the 'planet' needs solutions, in lieu of discussion, which you decline to supply.

There is no solution, since part of the problem is natural.
There is only mitigation. Try to pay attention, please. I make note,
though, that you have proved my original point - you only read what
you want to read - quite effectively here. This discussion is NOT
about solutions but rather your taking liberties with other's posts.
Since it is not about solutions, your statement about my declining to
supply them is silly, especially since this is a problem without a
solution. In future, please stay on topic and try not to put words in
other people's mouths.

Warming 99.999999999999999999999999999999% Certain!
 

February 13, 2004

David Ball wrote:

I'm not sure what Roger is trying to prove.

We aren't trying to 'prove' anything, Science is demonstrative, and the evidence clearly
demonstrates what hydrocarbon combustion is doing to this planet.

Not the way Roger is doing it.

Well, maybe he still confuses proof with demonstration. That's his problem.

The public needs honest open
discussion on this subject, not the musings of a few extremists who
are either trying to hide the truth or blow it out of all proportion.

No, the 'planet' needs solutions, in lieu of discussion, which you decline to supply.

There is no solution, since part of the problem is natural.

Let's think this through. Humanity's contribution to the problem exceeds the natural
contribution, therefore humanity has the technology to change climate. That seems to be in
direct conflict with your statement : 'there is no solution'.

There is only mitigation.

That would be a solution. As would remediation.

Try to pay attention, please. I make note,
though, that you have proved my original point - you only read what
you want to read - quite effectively here.

No, I have only demonstrated that what you claim : 'there are no solutions', is false. The
statement of the problem clearly demonstrates that solutions exist.

This discussion is NOT
about solutions but rather your taking liberties with other's posts.

I'm not discussing anything with you, I only comment that what you claim is not demonstrable.

Since it is not about solutions, your statement about my declining to
supply them is silly, especially since this is a problem without a
solution.

And I have clearly demonstrated you claim to be false.

In future, please stay on topic and try not to put words in
other people's mouths.

Why bother, you are a crackpot, since you clearly continue to make false claims, after those
claims have been clearly demonstrated to be false.

I will continue to 'comment' on that interesting phenomenon.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Warming 99.999999999999999999999999999999% Certain!
 

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:12:46 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
wrote:

February 13, 2004

David Ball wrote:

I'm not sure what Roger is trying to prove.

We aren't trying to 'prove' anything, Science is demonstrative, and the evidence clearly
demonstrates what hydrocarbon combustion is doing to this planet.

Not the way Roger is doing it.

Well, maybe he still confuses proof with demonstration. That's his problem.

No, his problem lies in trying to prove a pre-determined
result.


The public needs honest open
discussion on this subject, not the musings of a few extremists who
are either trying to hide the truth or blow it out of all proportion.

No, the 'planet' needs solutions, in lieu of discussion, which you decline to supply.

There is no solution, since part of the problem is natural.

Let's think this through. Humanity's contribution to the problem exceeds the natural
contribution, therefore humanity has the technology to change climate. That seems to be in
direct conflict with your statement : 'there is no solution'.

LOL. That doesn't invalidate my point, although your segue
into areas having nothing to do with the original post certainly
strengthens my point that you don't read what people say, but instead
try to put words in their mouths. Here's a tidbit for you: you aren't
smart enough to put words in other people's mouths. Concentrate
instead on getting the ones coming out of your own mouth correct.
Let's revisit the point you raised, even though it has nothing
to do with the original post I made. A significant part of the
observed warming is natural. Since we can only deal with that portion
of the problem we are directly responsible for, there can be no
outright solution. We can mitigate the warming by reducing our
emissions. We cannot SOLVE the problem, because a significant portion
is natural.


There is only mitigation.

That would be a solution. As would remediation.

I suggest you pull out a dictionary and look up what the word
mitigation means. We could reduce our emissions to zero and warming
would still occur. Please pay attention.


Try to pay attention, please. I make note,
though, that you have proved my original point - you only read what
you want to read - quite effectively here.

No, I have only demonstrated that what you claim : 'there are no solutions', is false. The
statement of the problem clearly demonstrates that solutions exist.

A lie, but if it makes you feel better please feel free to
cling to the illusion.


This discussion is NOT
about solutions but rather your taking liberties with other's posts.

I'm not discussing anything with you, I only comment that what you claim is not demonstrable.

On the contrary, you replied directly to a post I made
concerning your bad habit of taking liberties with other people's
posted comments. Since then, you have illustrated this behaviour
admirably. A wonderful example of this is your statement about my not
offering solutions. Since the original post I made had nothing
whatsoever to do with this topic, indeed, the entire thread has
nothing to do with it, you were taking liberties.


Since it is not about solutions, your statement about my declining to
supply them is silly, especially since this is a problem without a
solution.

And I have clearly demonstrated you claim to be false.

A lie, but again, feel free to believe whatever you wish.


In future, please stay on topic and try not to put words in
other people's mouths.

Why bother, you are a crackpot, since you clearly continue to make false claims, after those
claims have been clearly demonstrated to be false.

LOL. If you say so. I'm not the one who can't answer a simple
post in a simple direct manner. Since you likely won't bother to even
look at a dictionary, let me save you the time...

Main Entry: mit·i·gate
Pronunciation: 'mi-t&-"gAt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -gat·ed; -gat·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin mitigatus, past participle of
mitigare to soften, from mitis soft + -igare (akin to Latin agere to
drive); akin to Old Irish moíth soft -- more at AGENT
1 : to cause to become less harsh or hostile : MOLLIFY aggressiveness
may be mitigated or... channeled -- Ashley Montagu
2 a : to make less severe or painful : ALLEVIATE b : EXTENUATE

To make less severe or painful. Seems pretty straightforeward.


I will continue to 'comment' on that interesting phenomenon.

What? That you selectively edit people's posts adding in your
own bizarre version of events? Why bother? It's readily apparent that
you do so.