The biggest scam in history

[crelf]

Sorry I missed a couple letters in your name...

There are far too many superfluous letters in there anyway!

[hooovahh]

Woo-hoo! Now I'm famous!

Sorry I missed a couple letters in your name...

First of all I highly doubt you're famous simply because you linked in my signature (I'm implying that I'm a nobody). Secondly it does have too many letter and people mis-spell it all the time.

And to be clear I am not Crelf's alter ego. But it is a little flattering for you to say that. I am my own person, and it wouldn't take much research into it to find that out. I think every result on google for hooovahh is me, and if I were Crelf's alter ego it would have to be a pretty elaborate setup since there are postings of hooovahh around the net since 2002 or so.

Sorry Paul for saying your postings were resembling Alfa's (I forgot it was spelled oddly before), it didn't add any thing to the topic and it served no purpose posting it.

[Gary Rubin]

First of all I highly doubt you're famous simply because you linked in my signature (I'm implying that I'm a nobody).

Damn. I guess I'll have to try for a more noteworthy accomplishment.

And to be clear I am not Crelf's alter ego.

I know. I felt a little bad about posting that. First you're being criticized for not being senior enough to post on LAVA, then I make a joke about you not even existing... Sorry. Rough day for Hooovahh's ego (alter or otherwise)...

[crelf]

And to be clear I am not Crelf's alter ego. But it is a little flattering for you to say that.

Awww - and that's flattering for you to say that too

I think every result on google for hooovahh is me, and if I were Crelf's alter ego it would have to be a pretty elaborate setup since there are postings of hooovahh around the net since 2002 or so.

Hang on a tick - are you saying that I couldn't do that if I wanted to?!?

...actually, you're right - I'm far too lazy to have an alter ego

[Cat]

Rough day for Hooovahh's ego (alter or otherwise)...

Okay, so then I need to apologize to hooovahh for thinking someone had called him an underling, and to crelf for second-handedly calling him nefarious and potentially irksome. And I definitely apologize for the worst insult of all: calling crelf "Senior Management".

[crelf]

Okay, so then I need to apologize ... to crelf for second-handedly calling him nefarious and potentially irksome.

No apologies needed - that's pretty accurate, although you forgot handsome and omnipitant.

And I definitely apologize for the worst insult of all: calling crelf "Senior Management".

Now where's that (mooning) emoticon...

[Daryl]

This thread is getting weird

[Irene_he]

On this snowing, cold, wet day, stand aside, watching others fighting each other, it actually feels warm and fun.

Sorry, maybe I should not tell the world this "true" feeling.

[PaulG.]

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.

Edited December 11, 2009 by PaulG.

[PaulG.]

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".

[PaulG.]

The report was derived from research at the University of East Anglia, NASA and the British Met Office, which is responsible for weather forecasts in the United Kingdom. All three organizations have refused to release all or part of their raw data. The public only has access to "value added" data that have been corrected and massaged.

[PaulG.]

Gore Sounds New Alarm

[PaulG.]

[Daklu]

A petition signed by over 30,000 American scientists.

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.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Daklu

[PaulG.]

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.

Edited December 15, 2009 by PaulG.

[PaulG.]

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

[Daklu]

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.

Understanding the scientific method and being a scientist are two very different things. When they say 31k "scientists," the impression is that these are PhD's, researchers, etc., who have some level of expertise in the area being discussed, not a bunch of reasonable intelligent people whose knowledge is based on second and third hand information gathered off the internet.

And just who gets to say someone is "qualified" to have an opinion on global climate studies?

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

Having an opinion requires no qualification whatsoever, other than perhaps a pulse. But the question isn't whether I'm qualified to have an opinion, it's whether I'm qualified to sign the petition. The petition specifically says, "There is no convincing scientific evidence..." I cannot, in good conscious, sign that petition because I don't have the expertise, background, or understanding of the body of climate research to make that claim. In my opinion, people who have signed the petition without a full understanding of the science and research aren't much different than the scientists at the CRU. Both are using disingenuous methods to pursue political goals.

So to answer your question, I get to say whether or not I'm qualified to sign the petition. By the standards I set for myself, I'm not.

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

If you feel you have done the research and have enough knowledge to sign the petition, I am happy for you. I wish I had the time to delve into the subject enough to satisfy myself. My comments were not intended to be a slight against you or anyone else.

[Phillip Brooks]

I think this cartoon sums up how I feel (and possibly PaulG also)...

http://www.theweek.com/cartoons/index/104112/Truth_and_the_global_warming_debate

[PaulG.]

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.

[PaulG.]

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.

Edited December 16, 2009 by PaulG.

[crelf]

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 had to look it up:

sycophant (from the Greek συκοφάντης sykophántēs) is a servile person who, acting in his or her own self-interest, attempts to win favor by flattering one or more influential persons, or by saying lies against a fellow citizen for gaining a kind of profit.

[PaulG.]

New Scientist becomes Non Scientist.

The scandal grows.

... and grows.

Edited December 17, 2009 by PaulG.

[James Beleau]

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.org/wiki/Respiratory_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.org/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.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_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/2009/08/07/autos/cash_for_clunkers_sales/index.htm

I shall see what more I can dig up tomorrow.

[PaulG.]

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 ...

Edited December 18, 2009 by PaulG.

[bgapske]

Point 5: I'm sure the 0bama...

Who is this "0bama" guy you keep referring to?