Myreader.co.uk  
uk news, chat and community
   home   |   control panel login   |   archive   |  
 
misc
announce
answers
consultants
d-i-y
environment
environment.conservation
gov.agency.csa
gov.local
gov.social-security
gov.social-work
misc
philosophy.atheism
philosophy.humanism
philosophy.misc
radio.amateur
railway
sci.astronomy
sci.med.nursing
sci.med.pharmacy
sci.misc
sci.weather
singles
telecom
telecom.broadband
telecom.mobile
telecom.voip
test
transport
transport.air
transport.buses
transport.ferry
transport.london
transport.ride-sharing
  
 
date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:37:10 +1000,    group: uk.environment        back       
METABOLISM ALL MESSED UP   
We're nearing the point of no return. Hooray!

  A UN climate change report out next month will show that
greenhouse gases have reached dangerous levels, with emissions
more likely to cause irreversible climate change, scientist Dr
Tim Flannery warned ...

  Dr Flannery - author of climate change book The Weather Makers
and a leading expert on global warming - described how the world
economy was 'on a collision course with the metabolism of our
planet'.


My money's on the global economy.

Do your worst, puny metabolism
-- 

Regards

Bonzo

"When I, with some colleagues at NASA, attempted to determine how
clouds behave under varying temperatures, we discovered what we
called an 'Iris Effect,' wherein upper-level cirrus clouds
contracted with increased temperature, providing a very strong
negative climate feedback sufficient to greatly reduce the
response to increasing CO2. Normally, criticism of papers appears
in the form of letters to the journal to which the original
authors can respond immediately. However, in this case (and
others) a flurry of hastily prepared papers appeared, claiming
errors in our study, with our responses delayed months and
longer. The delay permitted our paper to be commonly referred to
as 'discredited'." Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology
MIT and Member of the National Academy of Sciences
date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:37:10 +1000   author:   Bonzo

Bonzo - who pays him to post lies here?   
"HangEveryRepubliKKKan"  wrote
>> 1998 14.57  *********************o*****
>> 1999 14.33  *****************>>>>o
>> 2000 14.33  *****************>>>>>o
>> 2001 14.48  ************************o
>> 2002 14.56  *************************o**
>> 2003 14.55  **************************o*
>> 2004 14.49  *************************>>o
>> 2005 14.63  *****************************o**
>> 2006 14.54  ***************************>>>o
>>
>>   Look at all those "o"'s lined up there.

"Bonzo"  wrote
> The "0"'s are NOT THE DATA!
> They have created a trend which does not exist in the data.
> Voodoo statistics!

  Ahahahahahahahahaha... Stupid KKKonservative KKKlown. A trendline skirts
across the top of the data leaving equal portions of the data above and
below.  In this instane 10 dots above, and 14 below as a result of the crude
nature of ascii graphics.  Nevertheless it represents the best line that can
be fitted to the data based on minimizing the square of the distance between
the line and the real data.  It's called a least squares curve fit.

  You are completely ignorant when it comes to statistics and mathematics in
general aren't you Bonzo.

  Ahahahahahaha.. You don't know what statistics are, where it comes from,
how it is used, or how to use it, and yet in your vast ignorance, you seem
to think that you know more about science than all of the worlds scientists.

  "Voodoo statistics"  Ahahahahahahahah...  You need to go back to public
school and take a refresher course in basic technical literacy.

  Stupid... Stupid.. KKKonservative KKKlown....


"Bonzo"  wrote
> Here is the data which shows NO TREND!
>
> 1998 366.50 2.5721     14.57
> 1999 368.14 2.6148     14.33
> 2000 369.41 2.6399     14.33
> 2001 371.07 2.6672     14.48
> 2002 373.16 2.7032     14.56
> 2003 375.80 2.7487     14.55
> 2004 377.55 NA            14.49
> 2005 379.75 NA            14.63
> 2006 381.90 NA            14.54

  No?  Lets plot the data and find out shall we?  Here it is along with the
best linear fit to the data shown as "o".

1998 14.57  *********************o*****
1999 14.33  *****************>>>>o
2000 14.33  *****************>>>>>o
2001 14.48  ************************o
2002 14.56  *************************o**
2003 14.55  **************************o*
2004 14.49  *************************>>o
2005 14.63  *****************************o**
2006 14.54  ***************************>>>o

Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.

So Bonzo, who is paying you to post lies to this newsgroup?
date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 20:41:05 -0700   author:   HangEveryRepubliKKKan

Google
 
Web myreader.co.uk


    COPYRIGHT 2007, YARDI TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, ALL RIGHT RESERVE  |   contact us