PaulG.

... The temperature scales depicted are wrong. Antarctica's average temperatures are never around the freezing point...

Can't see the scales. As you posted them they are too small. But from everything I've come to understand about these scales they are based upon a median and not actual temperature. I don't think we are talking about average temperatures from Antartica, but medians. I could be wrong. I would like to see the data on a readable scale.

Hello again,

Just wanted to share that i solved my problem for now and put the program for any other newbie like me to see how is it done.

...

Thanks for your help !

Wasn't that fun?

... This is truly an amazing bunch we have here.

Indeed.

Mostly.

With the exception of a few off-topic juvenile "tickle party" posters and no-life zombie-watchers we have an exceptional collective here. I was hoping to tap into that collective.

That said, I will take what you said to heart. But I must respond later.

I'm leaving to be with my family for Christmas. But I will be back next week.

Happy Holidays to you and yours, Francois.

Oops... it turns out CO2 is destroying the planet. Nobody saw that one coming...

When did we all decide to forget our grade school biology?

CO2 is NOT a pollutant. We exhale it. Plants need CO2 to survive. And it does NOT cause the green house effect. In fact, higher concentrations of CO2 can cause an increase in the amount of global vegetation. That has happened in earth's past.

+3 for this? Here?

ok, so what is your point exactly?

Have you bothered to read this thread?

is it that you don't believe in climate change? the PICTURES OK? that you posted seem to show that there is continuous change. stop yelling please, btw.

is it that you don't like the consequences that this climate change may have to your lifestyle? that's political, so don't complain about a couple of scientists gone bad. they're bad people, we all agree; doesn't necessarily mean the science is bad.

is it that you don't share the political views of the people stressing this climate change, global warming?

I'm not trying to make this political. Science goes beyond politics. You are making this political. Again, read the thread.

nobody likes being lied to (whether or not this is happening here). wake up, happens all the time. if you want to keep this discussion 'clean', you should also make clear why this is such a big issue for you.

You are repeating yourself. I'll repeat myself: read the thread.

if it is a political thing it would be best if we stopped this discussion pretending we're scientists, because the "data" I've seen sofar in this discussion (pro or con) is laughable at best.

Just how can data be "laughable"? If you don't want ice core data then please feel free to find something else and present it here. And if the way the data are presented is "laughable" all I can say is graphs are the simplest way I know how to present such data. If you need something even simpler to wrap your head around please help us out.

what's even worse: it doesn't take a scientist to draw these graphs.

it doesn't mean anything, pro or con without proper source and justification.

Again, please feel free to post data with what you would consider "proper source and justification". From everything I have gathered from my critics so far: GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

My take on it:

Geeks are social misfits because they like technology.

Nerds are social misfits because... they're social misfits.

Geeks become your boss.

Nerds become your waiter.

Geeks expect to give technology tips to those they interact with.

Nerds expect to receive monetary tips from those they interact with.

Geeks are comfortable with who they are.

Nerds are comfortable imagining they are someone else.

Nerd/Geek status crosses gender boundaries, though in general I think it's easier for a boy to be considered a nerd than a girl. Once you reach adulthood the nerd label usually isn't applied any more. Then you're just "weird."

Odd, I would have totally swapped your definitions here.

Me, too. When I think of "nerd" I think of Weird Al Yankovich in "White and Nerdy", Bill Gates ... and one of my nephews. I don't know about Al or Bill but my nephew (he describes himself as a "nerd") is extremely popular with the ladies. He wants to be a nerd, that's fine with me.

Geeks are geeks. Pencil-neck chicken head biter-offers. (or something like that)

And there's no signature on this article... and no references about where those graphs came from.

I believe the graphs came from this video I posted earlier.

It does not take a scientist to understand those graphs.

I figured that is why raw data was deleted. The "hockey stick" probably took a nose-dive over the last 10 years and any idiot with half a brain could see that in a graph.

That's why graphs work best for me.

OK. Just look at the pictures. The pictures are the graphs. I know graphs are boring and are not as much fun as pictures of bunnies and puppies and kittens but they are still PICTURES. OK?

Stay 0n t0pic. Thanks.

And the cabal has infiltrated Wiki.

If you still believe in global warming watch this video.

How to Manufacture a Climate Consensus

Whether or not 'climate change' is real is almost irrelevant in the face of other more immediate conspricies. I no particular conspricy order.

1. Stop breathing so much; You are making ... http://en.wikipedia....piratory_system?

2. Whatever your feeling on global warming/climate change or whatever they want to call it, Polution is real. Do not believe me; check it out first hand here. http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Zug_Island Polution is bad if you breathe; See point 1.

3. 'Peak oil' http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/, unsastainable energy, etc. However you look at it, even if you believe oil bubbles up magicaly from the earth's core http://en.wikipedia....etroleum_origin and is unlimited, there is an undenyable limit to how fast we can obtain it. This exists when you compare an ever expanding demand for energy with a finite rate of energy aquisition. Either a) the population of this planet must cease its increase or declines AND b) economic growth also stagnates/receeds OR new sustainable energy sources are found. These sources require our current low cost energy sources to research and implement. Yet people donot want to concern themselves with new energy sources until after the now low cost ones become a problem, which then leads back to a lack or resources to achieve these new resources. Waiting until leads to both a and b occuring on its own much more severly. Life today is like partying with all your cash on payday then not having money for rent. PS. Even the conservative experts expect this within 30 years.

4. Helping the poor is the best way to ensure everyone (including the rich) get richer.

5. Cash-for-Clunkers was a conspiricy against SUVs? An SUV was the leading vehicle bought during cash for clunkers. http://money.cnn.com...sales/index.htm

I shall see what more I can dig up tomorrow.

+1, James.

Points 1 and 2: This interesting lecture from a scientist at James Cook University, Australia. It's only 10 minutes long but IMO Professor Bob Carter gives on of the most succinct and profound 10 minutes I've ever watched questioning what is now the GW/"CC" scam. The earth may actually be COOLING!!

"All scientists are skeptics." At least I thought they were at one time.

Point 3: Nuclear is the answer for the short term and near-long (100 years) term. Fusion after that.

Point 4: Helping the poor is noble and good. I firmly believe that the vast majority of Americans do so - generously. And I also firmly believe that none of us need our government to tell us where to help the poor with stolen confiscatory taxes.

Point 5: I'm sure the 0bama administration and the rest of the planetary watermelons ("green" on the outside, red on the inside) expressed a collective "DOH!" when hearing this.

Looking forward to more honest bantering with you as your time permits. Thanks. I don't get much of that from your side of the fence.

This just in ...

Waaaa! Tesla isn't David Bowie! Ziggy Stardust and Alternating current! I am crushed.

Bowie played a great Tesla but I thought The Prestige was boring. I'm hoping someone will do a movie about the supposed correlation between the Tunguska event and Tesla testing his Death Ray.

New Scientist becomes Non Scientist.

The scandal grows.

... and grows.

I'll take that one further and say that not only is seniority as a software engineer irrelevant to discussions in the Lounge, but also that such seniority is irrelevant to discussions about software engineering.

Are junior people not allowed to voice their opinions? Are they not allowed to have good ideas?

Of course "junior" people are allowed to voice opinions. Don't be ridiculous. But when a junior posts here while admitting that the senior arrived at the same opinion just makes the junior look like the senior's sycophant/toady.

I wrote this little utility that presents a list of all running VIs in all contexts (except NI.* and JKI.*). Clicking on one in the list will give you the option to abort it (it's useful if your VI is stuck). Someone released one on the other forum but the diagram was locked and I was curious...

I put it in my LabVIEW 8.6\project folder. Perhaps it'll be helpful to you.

*WARNING* Being that I put this in my project folder, I set the top-level VI to run when opened. Take appropriate measures if you don't want this behavior. It also closes its Front Panel when it's done.

Jim

This one is unlocked? Cool. I'm curious to see how this works.

This is a great utility. I have it on my desktop and use it often.

If you feel you have done the research and have enough knowledge to sign the petition,

Can't say I have done the research. Few have, unfortunately. And the only way to get the data to do so is if you are part of the GG/"CC" Elect.

That fact alone should tell you that the mantra from the GG/"CC" chicken littles is coming from a religious cult, not from scientists.

You don't need to be a scientist to figure that out.

"NASA-Gate". Another reason for the world to hate us.

I read through that link a bit and calling them all "scientists" is... uhh... disingenuous. Apparently all you need is a "formal educational degrees at the level of Bachelor of Science or higher in appropriate scientific fields."

2.6k signers are mechanical engineers. I'm a mechanical engineer and I certainly don't feel qualified to sign the petition. 500 aerospace engineers. 7.2k general engineering degrees. 2.1k electrical engineers. 400 metalurgists!? Huh? Entomology? Animal science? Medicine? I believe some people who signed the petition reviewed the available data and are qualified, but there's no way I believe all 31k of them are.

I don't think it is "disingenuous" at all. I think the point is this: everyone who signed this petition demonstrated that they are intelligent enough to get a degree in engineering. Don't all engineers understand the basics of the scientific method? Dear God, I hope so.

The powers-that-be in the GW/"CC" debate have thrown the basics of the scientific method into the toilet.

And just who gets to say someone is "qualified" to have an opinion on global climate studies? (THERE. I think I gave this science a proper name! )

Al Gore? UN bureaucrats? President 0bama? Please.

Mankind has been through this before. Galileo comes to mind. Some day we will come back to the time where most of us believe the earth revolves around the sun and not around some monstrous political agenda.

Give yourself and the rest of us a little more credit.

This thread is getting weird

It's what happens when the Disciples of the Church of Global Warming, We Mean, "Climate Change" go off-topic but heathen apostates on the other side are not allowed to. And when you try to respond they get hysterical and you are accused of being "mean" and "offensive" and "attacking" someone "personally".

I'm sorry Paul lately I've found your posts offensive and frustrating but I won't tell you to stop posting, and I'm not going to report you, you can post what ever you want.

The irony. You went off topic first. I was responding to you accusing me of being another Alfa. Did I miss something? I could have taken that personally, I guess. Now I'm going to report you to the moderator. So there.

(Just kidding)

How should I have responded? "Yea, yuck yuck you can call me Gamma! Duh!"

As far as you not liking to argue and being "offended": If you might not like the response, don't take the shot. I was as gentle as I could be. Never know just how sssensitive someone can be around here.

I don't understand what you mean -- do you think the insurance industry or health care industry can reform itself?

No. But our federal government, in it's current condition will most certainly make things worse. As much as I believe in states rights I don't even think the states can reform much of anything anymore. The federal government simply has way too much authority and control over too many areas of our lives.

We had a quick discussion here about how Alpha hasn't been back since Lava 2.0, and we made the connection that Paul's posts are starting to resemble his (no offense Paul) So someone here has come up with a new name, and I think from now on we can all refer to Paul as "Paul Gamma"

On a side note isn't it rude to double post? What about triple, or quadrupole post? I realize this rule is usually in place to prevent people from asking for a bunch of stuff without allowing other users to give back first, just wondering if the rule still applies here.

Alfa (not "Alpha") has posted quite a few times since 2.0. As far as calling me "Paul Gamma" you can call me anything you want. But here my name is PaulG.

And what do you mean by "double post"? If you mean posting more than once before someone responds I apologize. I didn't think of it as being "rude". I see it as a continuation of what I had posted previously. "Expounding" if you will. A small minority have complained that I have not provided enough information to make my case. I am simply providing further information as I find it. Besides, you know as well as I do that I'm not forcing anyone here to read anything I post.

I'm not an Alfa nor am I stupid. If I post here another 2, 3 or 10 times and nobody responds I'll get the message that this thread is dead and move on. I won't whine for cry about it. I have already done more for what I was wanting to accomplish (just bringing folks up to speed on the Scam that is Global Warming/"Climate Change") than I could have imagined. (Thanks, LAVA's )

I haven't done the math, but I think I've gotten more up-clicks on this post than I have on all my other previous posts combined. Someone(s) here likes what I'm saying and what we are talking about.

This is the lounge. "Anything goes". If you want me to stop posting on this thread you can always take it up with the moderator. It wouldn't be the first time Micheal A. has brought to my attention something I posted on this thread because someone got their feelings hurt. ( )

As long as global warming, I mean "climate change" is a topic of discussion in the real world I will probably feel the need to post something here from time to time. GW/"CC" is too important of an issue for scientists in general and programmers specifically.

As an aside, I spend a lot of time on other blogs/forums that have nothing to do with science but are more political in nature. For the most part my concerns about GW/"CC" are preaching to the choir. Here I get feedback from a lot of very intelligent folks all across the political and international spectrum. I find it rewarding and gratifying, whether someone agrees with me or not.

And Hooovahh, (just some personal advice) the next time you and some co-workers reach some conclusions and/or concerns about me and what I am saying here, I suggest you let the person with more seniority make the case here. In this case I am certain that person is not you.

We know what I am talking about. I have enjoyed your posts here and want to keep bantering here with you. I would not want this (or any) response to possibly hurt your feelings, either and possibly get me into trouble (again) with the moderator. Fair enough?

I rest my case.

Unfortunately, the current bills in congress do not address any of this.

Be thankful. Real reform stands a much better chance of happening when the feds keep their evil little paws off of something.