OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth

[Active8]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 14:37:37 GMT, James Beck wrote:

In article <h5rtv0peh8sos8645fuqrs99m7bn97s8nu@4ax.com>,
jkirwan@easystreet.com says...
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com
wrote:

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

I hope no one is suggesting that.

Jon


Well the article said :
"the results showed the Earth's climate is far more sensitive to
increases in man-made greenhouse gases"

I would have to conclude that it is somehow been shown to be less
sensitive to naturally occurring gasses, or that the author is selecting
words to emphasize a particular point of view.

It's all plain English and if you back up and [re?]read my last

reply to you, you might see that your conclusion is wrong. Or just
take your question above and append the part you truncated, to wit:
"than previously thought?"

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Boris Mohar]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

It is probably because of the heat dissipated by all those computers.



Regards,

Boris Mohar

Got Knock? - see:
Viatrack Printed Circuit Designs (among other things) http://www.viatrack.ca

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:48:42 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jonathan Kirwan
jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote (in <h5rtv0peh8sos8645fuqrs99m7bn97s8nu@4
ax.com&gt about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com
wrote:

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

I hope no one is suggesting that.

Probably marginally true, or completely backwards, for CO2 from fossil
fuel, which contains less C^14O2 than the natural product.

Only an isotope would say a thing like that.

John

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <l7bvv0tv9egaf1bh7keev6jagsp84o76k4@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

Only an isotope would say a thing like that.

Well, yes, I do drink when alone. (;-) Two glasses with the evening
meal.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Ian]

"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:nPLsFVGGE8$BFwCc@jmwa.demon.co.uk...

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <l7bvv0tv9egaf1bh7keev6jagsp84o76k4@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

Only an isotope would say a thing like that.

Well, yes, I do drink when alone. (;-) Two glasses with the evening
meal.

Lovely - better than Jim's one. Shame you felt you had to use a smiley!

Regards
Ian

 

[Active8]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:31:54 +0000 (UTC), Ian wrote:

"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:nPLsFVGGE8$BFwCc@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <l7bvv0tv9egaf1bh7keev6jagsp84o76k4@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

Only an isotope would say a thing like that.

That's exactly what a fossil fuel would say.

Well, yes, I do drink when alone. (;-) Two glasses with the evening
meal.

Lovely - better than Jim's one. Shame you felt you had to use a smiley!

Heh heh. I think excessive use of smileys diminishes their
effectiveness when you actually *do* need one. One never knows how
to take it. Same for excessive profanity.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Active8]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:11:08 GMT, Ben Bradley wrote:

<snip>

Oh. The Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search.

Googling gimps also leads to... it's an amazing tool, I don't have
to remember lots of URL's.

That's how *I* found it They link to a nice page by Chris K.
Caldwell.

Anyone know how to pronounce Mesenne? Shall we try Bode again?

I don't even remember how I found the stuff. Previous neighbor is a
Lymphoma survivor and I stumbled across a few such groups. Maybe 4
at the time. I thought she might be interested.

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net>
wrote (in <6jfmfuuf7o88$.dlg@ID-222894.news.individual.net&gt about 'OT:
Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

Anyone know how to pronounce Mesenne?

'Mersenne' doesn't seem to present much difficulty. In modern French,
the final 'e' is not sounded, but maybe in early 17th century it was. If
so, it would just be the 'uh', or 'schwa', sound: 'mersen-uh'.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Active8]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 21:01:43 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net
wrote (in <6jfmfuuf7o88$.dlg@ID-222894.news.individual.net&gt about 'OT:
Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

Anyone know how to pronounce Mesenne?

'Mersenne' doesn't seem to present much difficulty. In modern French,
the final 'e' is not sounded, but maybe in early 17th century it was. If
so, it would just be the 'uh', or 'schwa', sound: 'mersen-uh'.
^^ that

would have been my guess, but would the beginning be mer-sen as in
"mercenary" or "mare-sen" as in "merci beaucoup poo-poo'.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Winfield Hill]

gwhite wrote...

Winfield Hill wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

It is not here: http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/INGLES/Warm.html

Of course not: totally-bogus "science" on parade. Pleeese, come
on, seriously, let's try to get to the bottom of this. Those who
are paying attention know full well that global warming will lead
to cooling trends in some parts of the world. So, Jonathan, where
did your "hottest 15 years on record" quote come from? Do we have
to pay Ł10 to the Independent Portfolio online to find out?


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[Chaos Master]

This is Ben Bradley for forever:

Are these the same 90,000 computers that are running the spybots
and stuff? ;-)

That's a new one on me. Any links?

I'd be very surprised if there were ONLY 90,000 computers with
active spyware and viruses (okay, virii) runnning in them.

I remember reading somewhere that ~100 millions of the PC's that were
connected to the Internet had some virus, spyware or "exploit"
installed.
--
Chaos MasterŽ, posting from Canoas, Brazil - 29.55° S / 51.11° W / GMT-
2h / 15m

"He [Babya] is like the Energizer Bunny of hopeless newsgroup
posting....or should that be Energizer bBunny"
- "ceed" on alt.comp.freeware, 24/1/2005

(to some groups: Yes, I use Windows and MS Office. So what?)

 

[me]

Ben Bradley <ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote in
news:tr9uv0ltlg0i1bvpg18ak8je6hvq39jj62@4ax.com:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:27:08 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net
wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:16:35 GMT, Rich Grise wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

GIGO !

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Active8]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 07:58:53 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

I found the following commentary from the project coordinator, Dave Frame:

Maybe he'd like to join us here

I visited the climateprediction.net site and on the page where they
talk about the GCM model, they *do* admit that they're not sure of
the parameterization, IIRC, of the model(s).

--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Active8]

On 1 Feb 2005 18:01:31 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

gwhite wrote...

Winfield Hill wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

It is not here: http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/INGLES/Warm.html

You're confusing me, Win.

Of course not: totally-bogus "science" on parade.

The article Jonathan ref'd is where the statement you questioned was
and it was the last sentence of the part posted. The article that
makes sense to me was ref'd by gwhite and you call it bogus?

What I'm confused about is that you seem to be calling an article
bogus when it's the other article that made the statement you
dispute. If the reason for my confusion is not clear, let play drama
class - paraphrasing - to illustrate how the discussion appears to
have went from my perspective:

Jon: "It says, '... Each of the...'"

Win: "Horsepucky! Cite!"

gwhite: "It doesn't say it here." [gwhite posts a different ref]

Win: "Of couse not. It's crap, too!"

[curtains]

The second article refutes the first but it sucks too?

Pleeese, come
on, seriously, let's try to get to the bottom of this.

I'm in.

Those who
are paying attention

Paying attention to what? I must have been asleep.

know full well that global warming will lead
to cooling trends in some parts of the world.

Cite or amplify, please. That's not obvious to me. I'm not an
atmospherics buff.

So, Jonathan, where
did your "hottest 15 years on record" quote come from? Do we have
to pay Ł10 to the Independent Portfolio online to find out?

The last sentence of the part he posted, saving us the pounds.

<quote>
Myles Allen, of Oxford University, said: "The danger zone is not
something we're going to reach in the middle of the century; we're
in
it now." Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since
1980.
</quote>

It's not quoted so it came from Steve Connor, Science Editor. His
ref? Dunno. Maybe Dr. Slick.

Conner doesn't appear to be citing refs. Rather, he's attributing
quotes.

No disrespect, but if you didn't see the statement in the short snip
of Jon's how can you have read the qwhite ref and concluded that it
is bogus when the article is 21 pages (minus refs) long?

Happy Groundhog's Day.
--
Best Regards,
Mike

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:46:25 +0000, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:27:08 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote:

That's a new one on me. Any links?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=604955

Global warming is 'twice as bad as previously thought'
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
27 January 2005

Global warming might be twice as catastrophic as previously thought,

OK, Jonathan, we're all going to die, unless we ...

?
???
Jonathan??

Unless we...

???
Anyone???
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:57:06 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

I think they're gonna be a little embarrassed - no, wait a minute.
The complete cessation of all human activity will solve it, because
there won't be any humans making measurements!

That _is_ their solution, isn't it? Total cessation of human activity
on Planet Earth?
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 04:25:07 -0500, Active8 wrote:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 07:58:53 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

I found the following commentary from the project coordinator, Dave Frame:

Maybe he'd like to join us here

I visited the climateprediction.net site and on the page where they
talk about the GCM model, they *do* admit that they're not sure of
the parameterization, IIRC, of the model(s).

Yeah, but "global-warming-alarmist-ism" doesn't roll off the tongue
quite as mellifluously as "antismokerism", even though they both have
as their agenda the Death of Free Will.
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 04:50:19 -0500, Active8 wrote:

Win: "Horsepucky! Cite!"

Active-eight, you MUST show this in quoted form, or be dismissed
as a liar and scoundrel.
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:07:07 +0000, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

Oh, well. I'd say... just ignore it a "new/entertainment" sound bite.

Oh. OK. Never mind.

Thanks for cluing up!
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.

 

[Pig Bladder]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 12:02:51 -0500, Active8 wrote:
....

I could go on, but you all are sharp enough to see the danger.

Which danger?

The danger that if we don't all "do something", we're all going to die
of "global warming"?

Or the danger of appointing some authoritarian dictator who says, "To
solve the global warming problem, you now must all ..."

?
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, Still Waiting for
Some Hot Babe to Ask What My Favorite Planet Is.