Global warming -- America's greatest threat!

Page 3 of 5  


The purpose of the constitution is to protect freedoms of the people.
If you pass a law that TAKES AWAY freedom from the people, that is not comp arable to passing a law the GIVES freedom to the people. There is a fundame ntal difference. New laws are almost always for taking away freedoms, this is a rare example of the opposite.
When I am elected king, I will make an amendment that any proposed new law or regulation that TAKEs AWAY any freedom must have a FREEDOM IMPACT STATEM ENT analysis that clearly outlines the cost/benefits of taking away freedom .
We need to fight for our right to party. :-)
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 1:38:03 PM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

mental difference. New laws are almost always for taking away freedoms, th is is a rare example of the opposite.

Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the law making process can be skipped because a president deems the new law gives someone freedom. Following that logic, one could come up with any number of laws that a president, abusing his power, could enact or nulify. And who says what Obama did only gives and doesn't take? The border states are already being hit with a huge burden by illegal aliens. His action just put out the welc ome mat for another incoming wave.

EMENT analysis that clearly outlines the cost/benefits of taking away freed om.
The difference is that we don't have a king, we're supposed to have a presi dent that obeys the constitution. Ultimately, it's highly likely that what Obam a just did will go down in flames in the courts. He will have screwed the ve ry people he's pretending to help, because now he's so poisoned the political landscape, he won't get any laws passed on immigration for the rest of his term. Probably not much else, either.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:35:55 -0600, Gordon Shumway

Ditto on that.
--
I kill-file all messages posted through Google Groups.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:35:55 -0600, Gordon Shumway

WTF. My employer was dropping and adding new insurance plans long before the ACA. You want the same plan, move to another country. Until this country is single payer, you're dreaming abut keeping the same plan.

You want prosecution? The R's will shortly be in control of all the "fact-finding committees." They can prosecute away. Hey, you forgot Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi.

So now the R's have the purse strings. They'll fix everything.

Joe Friday ain't in charge. Besides, that was a TV show.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 8:14:37 AM UTC-5, Vic Smith wrote:

What your employer was doing has nothing to do with Obama's promise that "if you like your health plan, you can keep it, nothing changes". Millions of Americans saw the private plans that they were paying for themselves get cancelled as a direct result of Obamacare. Many can no longer keep their doctor either. But apparently you admit that Obama and the libs did lie. People weren't dreaming. They heard the promises.

Committees can't prosecute.

The Republicans aren't an excuse for the lies and failures of Obama.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 05:32:03 -0800 (PST), trader_4

Too bad.

It works for me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 07:14:34 -0600, Vic Smith

If you don't like what your employer is doing you have three choices: 1. Get another job. 2. Buy your own insurance. 3. Quit whining and at least act like a man.

Keep showing how stupid you are like Dr. Gruber said. The house and senate the legislative branch of the government. They are responsible for creating the laws. The prosecutorial responsibility is under the purview of the Department of Justice. The president that you are in love with appoints the head of that and other department. If you are man enough I would like to hear an apology.

What part of "There's many more, but I think you get my point" are you incapable of understanding?

That depends on how "willing to work with the house and senate" Obama really is. However, this is yet another example of the lies we've hard from him many times before.
Next time get the facts before you show your stupidity again.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:07:12 -0600, Gordon Shumway

I didn't care what plan my employers offered. So your point is employers were already changing insurance plans. Duh.

Well that's too bad now isn't it? He was elected POTUS twice. Don't hold your breath for an apology. Just keep on whining.

Just thought I'd remind you, since it fits well with your other bullshit.

No Democrat president can work with the R's, so don't expect it. They like it that way. Gives them "whining rights."

You talking about "facts" is hilarious. Now go talk to trader, I'm done with you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/20/2014 6:48 PM, Vic Smith wrote:

I suspect the election was rigged, and the Chicago Machine had a bit to do with it.
--
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 17:48:19 -0600, Vic Smith

No, my point is the three choices listed above.

I don't know any democrats that are willing to admit when they are wrong so I didn't expect an apology. By the way, I bet you don't even know who Gruber is, do you?

What bullshit? Everything I said is true. Give me evidence of what I said is wrong. If you can do that I'll start voting Democrat.

Apparently you have forgotten Monica's boyfriend, Bill? He worked with the Republicans to pass welfare reform.

Show us some proof.

Show us some proof.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/20/2014 7:13 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:

And under single payer, one choice. Hey, isn't that an oxymoron? One choice?
--
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 7:14:28 PM UTC-5, Gordon Shumway wrote:

He doesn't care about what plan his employer offers. But he does care about Obamacare being mandated, defending Obama's lies, etc. Some of these libs are very strange indeed. If you don't care about what kind of healthcare plan your employer has, that says a lot about your overall intelligence, awareness, and concern about the world around you. Sounds like he's the kind of voter that Gruber was talking about.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
trader_4;3310356 Wrote: > On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:42:25 PM UTC-5, dgk wrote:-

> Climate Science Watch' (http://tinyurl.com/jwfsqso )-

> be a

> true

> science,

> organizations around the world that assess and synthesize the most > recent climate change-related science."

> of

> of

Trader: No, the IPCC doesn't make synthetic climate. I expect what they're referring to is the use of computer models to assess climate change.
Even when I was a petroleum engineer 30 years ago, we used main frame computers to model reservoir behaviour. Basically, we would generate a mathematical model of the reservoir under the ground with known rock parameters at each well location and see if we could get the computer to predict historical behaviour. That is, we would withdraw the known production from each well and see if the computer would accurately predict the pressure in the reservoir, the elevation of the gas/oil interface and the water/oil interface. If we could manipulate the unknown parameters into getting the computer to accurately predict historical measured pressures and gas/oil and oil/water interface elevations, then we could use that same model to predict how the reservoir would behave if we were to produce it in different ways, such as by implementing a water flood or perhaps a miscible flood. In that way, we maximize the amount of oil produced from large reservoirs.
Climate scientists do the same thing. If they can get their computer models to predict historically accurate global temperature increases, then they can use that model to predict what will happen with the global climate in the future under different scenarios, such as the world moving from gasoline powered automobiles to electric automobiles over the next 40 years, or by changing from coal burning electric generating stations to nuclear reactors, for example.
So, when they say the IPCC "synthesizes climate change - related science" it means that they use their computer models to see if scientific claims about global warming are realistic or not, based on whether their computer models agree with those claims.
Even 30 years ago, the people in computer reservoir simulation business were aware that computer climate models were amongst the most computer intensive applications of computer modelling that there was. 30 years ago, it took days and even weeks of time on a mainframe computer to run a single computer simulation, and so it was only universities and governments who owned their own computers that could afford to use them for climate modeling. Tying up a piece of equipment like a computer that cost 20 million dollars for a week would have been prohibitively expensive for independant or privately funded climate researchers.
--
nestork


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:17:14 PM UTC-5, nestork wrote:

Whatever it is, I've never heard of anyone saying they synthesize science, have you?

They did the same thing back in the 70's. They had models, computers, and they told us that we were entering a new ice age. Of course they will tell you that the models and computers are much better now. They said that in the 70's too. Any of those models are only as good as the guesses that go into making them. And as others here have pointed out, if you're a manmade global warming skeptic and you want $20mil in govt funds to work on a model, what do you think your chances of getting funded are?

AFAIK, it's still the same, nothing has changed. And if you're a skeptic, how much funding do you think you get? Forget about funding, you'd be lucky to still have your job.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

when you create a simulation of a geological formation, you have a lot of i nfomration about the formation. you also have the benefit of testing the s imulation on other formations and you can refine the simulation over time a nd experience.
electronics engineers use simulations to test circuits. the behavior of th e components is mostly well known. as soon as you get into an area where t he behavior of a component is not known exactly, the simulation fails.
the Earths climate system is chaotic (this is not just a verbal description , it has a technical mathematical meaning) and the behavior of the componet s are not well known. Also they do not have the benefit of testing the sim lation model. And yet they want to to use the results of these models as t he basis for important economc and social policy decisions.
I would like to create a challange for the climtae modellers. Create a sma ll system that has some complex chaotic behaivor that can be accuratly meas ured. Lets see if the models can predict the future behior of this small s ystem. Oh say, predict what number a rouleete wheel ball will land on. Th ink you can do that? Creating a model of the Earth's climate is a similar problem.
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 04:16:57 -0800 (PST), trader_4

I know, but I just like messing with idiots like him. I asked him in one of my replies just above this, if he can give me evidence of what I said was wrong I'll start voting Democrat. Knowing there isn't any, I figured that would at least shut him up.
So far, nothing but crickets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com;3311245 Wrote: >

> small system that has some complex chaotic behaivor that can be > accuratly measured. Lets see if the models can predict the future > behior of this small system. Oh say, predict what number a rouleete > wheel ball will land on. Think you can do that? Creating a model of > the Earth's climate is a similar problem.

Mark:
No, the surface of a roulette wheel has numerous protrusions on it's surface. The roulette ball hitting any of these would cause it to bounce, possibly into a different area of the wheel. Consequently, minute changes in the speed or timing of the roulette ball's release make a big difference in where the roulette ball winds up.
http://extremecasinoparties.com/roulette-wheel.jpg
I don't think it's reasonable to presume that the Earth's climate is THAT chaotic. If it were, then we couldn't tell with any degree of certainty when we would have summer or winter and how long those seasons would last. We could conceivably have -40 degree F temperatures for one week and then suddenly have +40 degree F temperatures the next. That's what can happen on a roulette wheel, but things aren't quite that chaotic in our weather.
--
nestork


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, November 21, 2014 1:17:15 PM UTC-6, nestork wrote:
http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/video-playlists/50jczp/climate-change?xrs=synd_facebook_112114_cn_37
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
@diybanter.com says...

Ignoring the fact that we've seen exactly that in Chicago in real life, you make an excellent point. (actually, -26 to +40, but I think that's close enough to what you're describing)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, November 17, 2014 8:37:59 PM UTC-6, snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com wrote:

You can't accept the known effect of high CO2 in a planetary atmosphere, and the MEASURED CO2 levels, but you believe that Noah floated around in a boat with all the animals.
Plus, you conveniently ignore the VERY WELL KNOWN reason for the current cold spell -- the huge typhoon Nuri which hit the Aleutians on November 7.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.