Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Replies: 111   Last Post: Jun 18, 2014 1:15 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
kefischer

Posts: 27
Registered: 4/29/14
Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Posted: May 30, 2014 11:01 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Fri, 30 May 2014 08:47:40 -0230, cloud dreamer
<reduce.reuse@recycle.net> wrote:

>On 29/05/2014 8:29 PM, kefischer wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 May 2014 18:40:35 -0400, "Michael J. Strickland"
>> <michael0658@comcast.net> wrote:
>>

>>> "The Starmaker" <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>> news:53861361.4D9E@ix.netcom.com

>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thomas Heger wrote:

>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 27.05.2014 18:36, schrieb The Starmaker:

>>>>>>> President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that "Ninety-seven
>>>>>>> percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made
>>>>>>> and dangerous."

>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi starmaker!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a brandnew idea, where 'climate change' actually came from.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason is deforestation (mainly)!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plants are living beings and they have kind of metabolism. Trees
>>>>>> are huge lifeforms and a forest is a lot of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The way to see the metabolism of plants is infra-red photography.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_photography
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As you see, the plants reflect and emit infrared. So less trees
>>>>>> means more heat (in form of radiation) that is reaching the
>>>>>> ground and less is heat emitted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plants have also a connection to CO2, because that is for trees
>>>>>> what oxygen is for us. Less trees means more CO2 in the
>>>>>> atmosphere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And: deforestation is - of course - manmade.
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason for cutting down trees is the price of wood. Wood is
>>>>>> quite expensive and an average tree can cost about 1000$.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Similar expensive is land (to grow cattle).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What could people do? Well, maybe less consumption of meat would
>>>>>> help, plus planting of new forests. (For forests an *increase* of
>>>>>> CO2 would actually better.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TH

>>>>>
>>>>> There is no such thing as 'climate change', which means the same
>>>>> thing as 'global warming'.

>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, maybe I didn't make myself clear..
>>>>
>>>> It's very simple...
>>>>
>>>> There is no global warming
>>>> There is no climate change
>>>> There isn't even a problem!
>>>>
>>>> There is no global warming problem.
>>>> There is no climate change problem.
>>>>
>>>> There is no problem. No problem exist.
>>>>
>>>> It's just a bunch of guys with a solution in search of a problem.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://notesfromfuture.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/frosty-the-snowman-33.png

>>>
>>> I see poor Starmaker, here is vying for ex-communication from the
>>> priesthood of "raw science". He shall henceforth be banished from the
>>> "circle of trust" and permanently exhiled outside the "circle of trust".
>>> Maybe we should give hiim one more chance to have his distinctiveness
>>> preserved in our reality collective.
>>>
>>> One more chance before he joins the legion of the condemned in my
>>> kill-file - lol.
>>>
>>> I'm quaking in my boots at the prospect of the Starmaker's "show trials"
>>> where I "will be forced to recant" the heresy imposed on me by my own
>>> extremely sophisticated, and reliable temperature sensors ( i.e. my own
>>> skin ) - lol.
>>>
>>> Let's take comfort, with all the heat trapped by the atmosphere, the
>>> earth's molten core is probably containing less of it and thereby on
>>> average, the earth may actually be cooling - lol.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, the part of the earth we inhabit is definitely heating.
>>>
>>> Mike

>>
>> In the region of the Great Lakes,
>> and many other places, the temperature
>> varies by way over 100 degrees each
>> year, and a bunch of "scientists" playing
>> with number averages, hiding the decline,
>> and moving the weather stations to
>> center city and airports to try to get
>> an annual average temperature rise
>> of one degree, and claim it will
>> make it very uncomfortable.

>
>
>
>I see you've been drinking the denier kool-aid.
>
>Just because your scientific knowledge is so lacking that you can't even
>understand the basic difference between climate and weather doesn't mean
>it's not happening.
>
>http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html
>
>As for "hide the decline" - how about we go through all your emails and
>take any three words we want...how about where you said "I like guys."
>
>Okay. From that, I guess you're homosexual.
>
>Never mind that the rest of the sentence is "I like guys taking matter
>into their own hands..."


Now we know what the cloud dreamer
dreams about. :-)


>And no...no one is moving weather stations to airports and city centres.
>The data is there for all weather stations not located in cities and
>airports. Go compile it yourself. You will still find a startling and
>accelerated increase in GLOBAL temperatures,


Obviously you know nothing about
the myth you are fixated on, there are
essentially NO increase in global
temperatures, let alone an accelerated
increase, there was an apparent increase
in the "annual average temperature of
the whole Earth" in the 70s and 80s,
but there hasn't been much change
lately.


>the worst of which is
>happening in the Arctic. So, unless you think they're only taking
>temperature readings from Yellowknife and Iqaluit, your rhetoric fails
>the test of PLAIN COMMON SENSE.


I'm not sure why you think the
Arctic warming would be bad,
I think the Polar Bear would be
able to find seals easier iv they
have to come to land to nest.

But I really don't care what
you think, the important thing
is never having an ice age,
that would really be bad.








Date Subject Author
5/27/14
Read nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Percival
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/27/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Mike
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Don Kuenz
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Kirby Grant
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Cryptoengineer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
antani
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/1/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Jim G.
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
2ju
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Jim G.
6/2/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
5/31/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Bill Steele
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Virgil
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Virgil
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
R Kym Horsell
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Lynn McGuire
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
David Hartley
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Greg Goss
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Cryptoengineer
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/8/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/9/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
6/10/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/13/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/17/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/18/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/7/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
John F. Eldredge
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/6/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Bill Steele
6/5/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Thomas Heger
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
6/4/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
6/3/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
The Starmaker
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
cloud dreamer
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
kefischer
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke
5/28/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
William December Starr
5/29/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Peter Trei
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Michael J. Strickland
5/30/14
Read Re: nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
J. Clarke

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.