MarkWebles

16 minutes ago, geeser said:

Gee Markus, does this NASA official do it for you?

NASA

My post did not address any point made in the article your originally post on solar minimums. If you re-read both you'll detect a slant contained in the former that doesn't exist in the latter. My point stands. And the planet continues to get warmer regardless of the number of snowballs you might feel inclined to grace the Senate with.

22 hours ago, geeser said:

 read more

CBN is, according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, in the category of CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE. "Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence." You might want to try for a source with a little more credibility.

ETA: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/christian-broadcasting-network-cbn/

On 1/29/2020 at 4:16 PM, Jreboll said:

“ Religious leaders try to show us a better way ..."

I'd love to see some evidence for this claim.

I recall hearing that The Rolling Stones were the greatest threat to the planet. Who to trust?

13 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

I was there in the U.S. when the EPA was created and I was directly involved in developing the technology and working on the clean up.

 

Now who's living in the past? I think you'll find that the EPA is just a leaky little boat when compared to what was envisioned 50 years ago. As for finger pointing, why not make an example of the American companies dumping in to the Rio Lerma? Do they escape responsibility for their actions simply because the government won't act? Who's at fault here, the companies doing the dumping or the government that signed-on to NAFTA that permits the rape of the environment? I wonder if, under NAFTA, anyone can in fact do anything. Profit over people.

As a high-school drop-out, I'd say The US is about to commence the return portion of it's round-trip trip journey from the '70s. People are still suffering in Flint and in Pureto Rico. Push back? Nada. Hypocrisy and American exceptionalism? Same thing.

13 minutes ago, gringohombre said:

Some people like living in the past and continue to try and pull apart a great country. Sad.

I think my irony meter just exploded. Again. You're a great and shining example of the easily led. Go read a book. Preferably one on American history. I'd recommend Zinn, but there's no pictures.

The lyrics are not racist, they decry racism as it existed in the '50s, and as it exists right now. The lyrics are meant to be ironic as they are sung by the very Puerto Ricans who are the victims of the casual racism they experience(d). Not knowing this makes you look, I don't know, reactionary, or worse. Putting your head in the sand is never a flattering look.

5 hours ago, bmh said:

The fact s that the state of many rivers n Mexico is appallng  especially the ones going through states with  ndustriies and large agricultural estates.. Mexicans do not respect the rivers or water and they will ending paying for it with money health and lack of water..

Do you think the problem is localized to Mexico? I can recall the Cuyahoga River* going up in flames, and the Mississippi and Hudson Rivers never looked terribly inviting. ...and by paying for it, you mean the industries and agricultural entities that are causing the effluent that is compromising these water ways should pay, right? Certainly not the average Mexican who would otherwise have to pay for it through taxes they can ill afford, right.

* The fire on the Cuyahoga helped usher in laws for the protection of water ways in the US. The very same environmental laws that Trump is repealing as we speak. Let's raise a glass of cool, clear water in the name of progress, shall we?  "Don't you listen to him Dan, He's a devil not a man".

36 minutes ago, Mainecoons said:

 One of the downers of living in Mexico is the poor job the government does in protecting the environment.

 

Absolutely right, MC! Such a thing would never happen in a typical American city; at random say... Flint, Michigan, where the well-being of its citizens is paramount.

"I like to be in America
OK by me in America
Everything free in America
For a small fee in America...

Life can be bright in America
If you can fight in America
Life is all right in America
If you're all white in America"

7 minutes ago, bmh said:

Bicycling is a luxury

...but what bothers me the most is all those people breathing air and drinking water: the nerve. bmh, get well soon.

17 hours ago, Ajijic_hiker said:

chapalence.....I think you are a complete XXXXXXXXX.....

(you fill in the blanks....jerks like you make me sick!)

Well, I guess we all know better than to mess with Ajijic_hiker. She might get sick. Look over there, is that a snowflake?

"who remade himself into a climatologist". No, he did not. His double doctorate is in engineering/economics. "became director of the IPCC". An administrative position, he had no input to any scientific determinations. "Nobel prize". Awarded to the IPCC (well known for it's conservative assessments), not to Dr. Pachauri.  He has little credibility in the climate sciences as he does not engage in actual science, and he has questionable integrity overall as is evidenced by allegations made against the Doctor of both financial and sexual transgressions. All this you would know if you wanted to. "scientific research is not based on consensus but on contradictory views".  Utter crap. "it says science is never "settled"". Thanks for the laugh. Everyone who cares enough to read for comprehension knows that scientific findings are provisional, subject to revision based on new information, which BTY, is why phrenology isn't in much demand today. Finally, you might want to include some quotes (except of course when not necessary, as in "settled") in your postings if you want to avoid accusations of plagiarism.

1 hour ago, pappysmarket said:

If the KKK published a paper that supports the theory that the earth revolves around the sun...would that make the theory wrong simply because of where it was published?

You seem to be making that argument instead of engaging with the argument itself. Why can't we have a civil discussion of almost any topic here?

The earth revolves around the sun? Wait here, I'll go ask Copernicus. Super great analogy you got there. We are well past the point of dialectics here, at least your own information-free postings suggest as much. Try finding a source the isn't immediately refutable and perhaps we'll discuss it. This isn't difficult. Vetting your sources is easy once you get the hang of it. My goal here, any way, isn't to convince you of anything, but rather to show the fence sitters just how weak the arguments contra-ACD are. Frankly, this has all the satisfaction of discussing the theory* of evolution with an evangelist, and to be sure eventually I will stop bothering, but for now there's always the chance that you'll post something substantive. Hope springs eternal, right?

* In science a theory is not a guess, but "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world."

Reiterating what your shill for the Oil industry has said doesn't further your claim. Why is this so difficult for you?  "Tide comes in, tide goes out, you can't explain it". -Another !d!o+ of the Right.

1 hour ago, pappysmarket said:

I found this to be an interesting article:

https://www.city-journal.org/global-warming#.XbGKGtFqQQM.email

Let's see what we can learn about Judith Curry

Funding from fossil fuel industry - Check
Won't reveal identity of clients - Check
Endeavors to create doubt about ACD - Check
Uses misleading/false data to support position - Check

Yeah, paint me impressed. She certainly has that je ne sais quoi the Right finds so compelling. What does mediabiasfactcheck.com have to say about www.city-journal.org?

RIGHT BIAS

If I had (and I have in fact produced evidence in past postings), would you have read it? Have you read any of the
links posted by myself, and by many other posters here, to sites providing evidence for the validity of ACD? The
quality of your own links suggest you might not recognize real evidence if it kicked you. As an aside, I find it
funny that some of the evidence you produce contra-ACD is to denigrate its proponents for being paid for their
work (almost sounds like capitalism), meanwhile the real profit is being made by the corporations who are sowing
doubt and doing their best to avoid consequences. This sowing of doubt is an old tactic, but it still seems to work, proving
Santayana's adage: 'Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.'

2 hours ago, geeser said:

I won't waste time responding to your "liar" charge but I would meet you to discuss it. I had rather try to enlighten those of you who can;t or won't research: 

Scientist refute anthropogenic climate change here

30,000 scientist say Anthropogenic climate change is a hoax

97% of scientist agree is a total hoax, it is only 32% at most

Are you suggesting that the links you posted are the result of research? You respond three weeks after my post, and this is all you got? I'd be less embarrassed for you if you posted a link to some random site selling Peanuts paraphernalia as proof of existence for the Great Pumpkin. What's most demoralizing is that you don't understand why what you've posted here fails as evidence for anything other than, perhaps, gullibility. Here's a tip: If a site uses the word Truth in it's banner, it's a sure bet the site contains none.

Here's an example of the crap you've subjected us to: "Evans shows data from Envisat (European satellites) which reveal how the sea level is rising 0.33 mm per year (3.3 cm per century), far below what the IPCC predicts (26-59 cm per century)"   A comment on Dr. David Evans damning (so called) evidence.

Can you see how he's comparing apples (point in time measurement) to oranges (predictions) and telling us it's all a sow's ear? I'll not waste any more time on your febrile machinations.

Yep, with respect to IPv6, it's best to wait until the last moment, because it's easy to learn and easy to deploy. Especially when under pressure. Way to ride the cutting edge.

Third time's the charm. So go for it!

6 hours ago, traderspoc said:

sent PM

traderspoc, if that PM was intended for me, I did not receive it.

3 hours ago, MtnMama said:

Just got this excellent article on the future of Windows from one of my favorite gurus (for personal computing as well as genealogy):

Say goodbye to Windows as you know it

 

Desktop-as-a-service. Privacy? What's that? Did my laptop's camera just turn-on by itself? Sheep to slaughter.

37 minutes ago, traderspoc said:

Edited above post  just found out CAD software will run much Better  with windows 8 and then upgrade to windows 10.

Also if you have a high end graphics card, that would be ideal one for our students.

 

Need windows 8 or better computers

traderspoc, have you considered replacing Windows in favor of Linux running one of the free, open source CAD packages? The laptops will likely run faster and at the very least you will not be at the mercy of a temperamental internet connection. There are other benefits to be had and if you'd like to discuss them, send me a message.

https://opensource.com/alternatives/autocad

1 hour ago, Natasha said:

Active ingredient in Cynoff is cypermethrin..... HIGHLY toxic to cats.  Does not affect dogs.

Thanks. I did not know that. Having only dogs I've never investigated further.

Go to a garden center and pickup a packet of Cynoff. Mix the powder with 3 litres of water and spray around doors, windows and other areas where a scorpion might gain entrance. Once dry the solution is harmless to pets. Scorpions will still get in (they are a robust creature, but they will be weakened considerably). And what jh5127 said above.