we could certainly affect the climate. by, oh i don't know, spewing lots of chemicals into the atmosphere. or if you want to get really extreme, nuke the world into oblivion. that would cause some serious climate change.

5/2/2007 1:37:26 PM

Quote :

"by, oh i don't know"

5/2/2007 1:40:06 PM

thanks for your contribution

5/2/2007 1:40:46 PM

Okay, you got me with the whole "nuke the world into oblivion thing" But AS STATED and LINKED in this thread already, its very debatable what effect our "spewing of chemicals" into the atmosphere is having.

Plus I was originally talking about human's efforts to stabilize the climate beyond what is natural, I'm not talking about our ability to fuck it up with Ozone depletion, acid rain, deforestation, etc. Contributing an extra 3% of a naturally occuring gas (co2) isn't making a huge difference.

5/2/2007 1:42:08 PM

^^my contribution is how can you admit that predicting something as fluctuating and small scale is difficult if not impossible to do, yet you seem sold that something as fluctuating and small scale as the last 100 years of climate is definitely human caused?

5/2/2007 1:45:25 PM

Study: Planting Trees to Fight Global Warming Could Cause Water Losses that Offset Climate Benefits

Quote :

"RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C. -- For years, scientists have proposed planting large numbers of trees as a means to reduce global warming by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, through a process called carbon sequestration. But according to a new study led by researchers at Duke University in cooperation with several institutions including RTI International, planting large numbers of trees leads to environmental changes that could offset the potential benefits of carbon dioxide removal."

http://www.rti.org/newsroom/news.cfm?nav=502&objectid=FF7764E1-A6F3-4EDE-A9B2E97D1EFFBED4

5/21/2007 1:36:18 AM

the :rolly-eye: summary of the complex dynamics involved in atmospheric research by our resident crank CHASS TA, is truly inspiring. i think we should just quit all scientific research and join hooksawburyboy's church.

5/21/2007 1:48:06 AM

^ Ridiculously typical. Do you have anything of value to add about the post at issue, joe_shithead? I didn't think so.

Quote :

"The study, published in the Dec. 23 issue of Science, was funded by Duke's Center for Global Change, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute for Global Environmental Change in the office of the U.S. Department of Energy, the inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and South Africa's Council of Scientific and Industrial Research. According to the report, researchers found that tree plantations reduce an area's water sources and deplete the soil's nutrients."

I'm sure all of the organizations listed above are on Exxon's payroll, right? BTW, I don't participate in organized religion--not that I'm down on those that do. But just keep up your lame generalizations, as your short, bald-headed self moves even further toward the looney-left fringe. GG!

[Edited on May 21, 2007 at 2:03 AM. Reason : .]

5/21/2007 1:58:37 AM

i dont know where you get that i'm short. I'm 5'10" ... are you some kind of lurchy pituitary freak? and by the way, im not bald. it's called "receding". apparently due to an abundance of testosterone

you, on the other hand, appear to be an anonymous troll afraid to reveal your mug to the TWW community. You who "claim" to be a grad student and TA, yet not one person here seems to know who you are.

you must be hiding something. plain and simple. what, i can only imagine. here are my suspicions

(1) you're a 50-year old troll who never went to college, but likes to photograph little girls (aka iphotou)

(2) you're the grand wizard of the Henderson County Ku Klux Klan. (aka salisburyboy)

(3) you're an NCSU student, but you dont want your "beautiful smart fiancee who has 4 bachelors degrees" to find out you've been trying to get into crackmonkey's "chocolate butter pussy"

so which is it? are you going to ever show yourself? or are you going to remain hiding in the shadows with the rest of the trolls, while you attack the physical appearance of people who you disagree with you?





[Edited on May 21, 2007 at 2:36 AM. Reason : ]

5/21/2007 2:26:12 AM

^I don't think he's with his beautiful, smart fiancee anymore swe can quit getting on him for that.

By the way, you're totally good-looking.

5/21/2007 2:39:51 AM

^^ LOL! You're an idiot! Every time you post that no one here knows me, you look like even more of a jackass--if that’s possible. Yeah, I believe that you've got some sort of chemical imbalance, but it ain't testosterone, dude.

Are you seriously going to whine like a little bitch about me going after your appearance when you continually do it to me? To borrow a quotation I often see you use, "That's some weak sauce."

Concerning this trinket about me allegedly being "afraid to reveal [my] mug," it's laughable--just like you. Why should I? So you can 'shop it next to a bag of dicks? No thanks! FUCK YOU!

^ Wrong--as usual.


[Edited on May 21, 2007 at 2:45 AM. Reason : .]

5/21/2007 2:40:29 AM

i dont say "weak sauce". because that would be weak sauce.

and who cares if someone photoshops your face next to a bag of dicks? WTF kind of excuse is that? are you really afraid of that? has anybody here had their face shopped with a bag of dicks? i mean, besides esgargs? newsflash: you're not that important of a celebrity here. are you totally paranoid? are you afraid that would give you "gay germs" or something?

holy shit. i think you're on

5/21/2007 2:59:52 AM

^ Well, I'd say you're a top candidate for president of the hooksaw anti-fan club here. And I'm not so sure about the "celebrity" thing--based on the obsessed posts I've seen continually directed at me by some.

Quote :

"you're not that important of a celebrity here"

PS: So, I am somewhat important? Hmmm. . .revealing.

[Edited on May 21, 2007 at 3:17 AM. Reason : .]

5/21/2007 3:15:06 AM

more like a 'inconvenient prick'

am i rite?



really tho, human impact on global warming is hard to decisively prove

5/21/2007 12:24:16 PM

^ true.

but to ignore or minimize the consistent and pervasive multi-disciplinary scientific evidence that it is, to some degree, caused or aggravated by human actions, is downright immoral.

its like the tobacco lobby testifying to congress: "There is no definitive scientific /proof/ that smoking causes lung cancer"

5/21/2007 3:30:34 PM

5'10 is short

5/21/2007 3:32:52 PM

avg height for an american male is 5'9"

5/21/2007 3:46:46 PM

so the average american male is short

5/21/2007 3:47:59 PM

To nobody in particular: can we please get back OT?

5/22/2007 1:14:21 PM

i havent seen it and never will if i can.... I don't need a PP lecture on how to be an arrogant asswad...

Quote :

"but to ignore or minimize the consistent and pervasive multi-disciplinary scientific evidence that it is, to some degree, caused or aggravated by human actions, is downright immoral."

caused? doubtful, aggravated? possibly, affected in some way, yes. but as it stands we really don't really know as much as we need to, to make any valid claims... much less ones of doom and gloom...

here's a thought, it's weather, it changes, deal...

5/22/2007 2:13:43 PM

when the blind anthro gw theory supporters get refuted by facts and logic they usually retort to "well shouldnt we at least try to make the world better"

5/22/2007 2:15:20 PM

lol true enough

the deal about fossil fuels and such is somewhat valid, if for any other point that they will eventually run out, and better energy sources are available / present is always good...

shit i wouldnt mind having a 'mr. fusion' powered car

waste in general is something to be avoided as much as possible... as it just contributes to general universal entropy !

5/22/2007 2:21:49 PM

Quote :

"Arab13 : i havent seen it and never will if i can.... I don't need a PP lecture on how to be to actually know anything about the actual subject being discussed, since I'd rather just blather my knee-jerk reactionary comments like every other arrogant asswad..."

fixed it for you.




[Edited on May 22, 2007 at 3:33 PM. Reason : ]

5/22/2007 3:32:27 PM

US Forecast Predicts Busy Hurricane Season

http://www.charlotte.com/209/story/131296.html

more predictions

somebody should dig up the predictions about last year's hurricane season just so we can revisit and compare the predictions to the actual hurricane season last year

[Edited on May 22, 2007 at 4:23 PM. Reason : .]

5/22/2007 4:20:02 PM

Quote :

"^^ LOL! You're an idiot! Every time you post that no one here knows me, you look like even more of a jackass--if that’s possible. Yeah, I believe that you've got some sort of chemical imbalance, but it ain't testosterone, dude. Are you seriously going to whine like a little bitch about me going after your appearance when you continually do it to me? To borrow a quotation I often see you use, "That's some weak sauce." Concerning this trinket about me allegedly being "afraid to reveal [my] mug," it's laughable--just like you. Why should I? So you can 'shop it next to a bag of dicks? No thanks! FUCK YOU! ^ Wrong--as usual. "

For those that don't want to read all this, I'll summarize:

"I am too much of a pussy to show my face to this website."

5/22/2007 4:21:34 PM

^says the alias with no pictures in his gallery

Quote :

"To nobody in particular: can we please get back OT?"

5/22/2007 4:24:02 PM

^^^ It's easy. They predict a lot of storms and when none happens, they say "oh, this was abnormal." They do the same thing in every subsequent year until they get it right then they scream OMG GLOBAL WARMING! GET THE KIDS!

5/22/2007 4:26:03 PM

Quote :

"fixed it for you."

5/22/2007 4:31:19 PM

^^i really don't see what hurricanes being difficult to predict has to do with global warming.

hurricanes are infrequent enough that a clear correlation between global warming and severe hurricanes is hard to defend.

this does not discredit the argument for anthropogenic global warming though

5/22/2007 4:34:03 PM

Quote :

"hurricanes are infrequent enough that a clear correlation between global warming and severe hurricanes is hard to defend."

Yeah, no shit.

Tell that to Al Gore and other politicians who try to link hurricanes with global warming.

5/22/2007 4:36:12 PM

yeah that was one bit of al gore's movie that i thought was pretty crappy.

5/22/2007 4:37:51 PM

Quote :

"i really don't see what hurricanes being difficult to predict has to do with global warming"

i really don't see how you can admit that hurricanes are difficult to predict and next week's weather is difficult to predict, yet somehow we have a much better ability to predict long term climate changes

5/22/2007 4:43:09 PM

I thought the whole bit about rising sea levels was crappy.

Especially considering that the IPCC found that "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected."

They predicted a rise of between 7 and 23 inches over the 21st century, which is quite a bit lower than the gloom and doom Gore predicts with the melting of the ice caps.

5/22/2007 4:43:20 PM

Quote :

"i really don't see how you can admit that hurricanes are difficult to predict and next week's weather is difficult to predict, yet somehow we have a much better ability to predict long term climate changes"

and how many times have i explained precisely why?

5/22/2007 4:44:35 PM

your explanation is precisely bullshit

5/22/2007 4:45:02 PM

Quote :

"i really don't see how you can admit that while hurricanes are difficult to predict and next week's weather is difficult to predict, that somehow we have a much better ability to predict long term climate changes"

Shit evens out over the long term. I can't predict what number will come up if I roll a 6-sided die, but I can tell you with certainty that it will average 3.5 if I roll it every day for a year.

Statistics, man. They aren't that complicated.

5/22/2007 4:46:26 PM

Quote :

"Statistics, man. They aren't that complicated."

but all the interworking systems of the earth are quite complicated

let alone the "long term" data we have is piecemeal

do you know how we know things like if you flip a coin 10,000 times, its probably going to land on each heads and tails about 5,000 times each? because we performed those experiments

what experiments have we performed to know how the atmosphere acts over a 50,000 year period? thats right...none

5/22/2007 4:48:17 PM

it's still far easier than predicting how many hurricanes will occur in a given season.

and not all science is directly experimental.

we can't perform experiments to know lots of things, but we can draw conclusions based on evidence.

[Edited on May 22, 2007 at 4:50 PM. Reason : .]

5/22/2007 4:49:17 PM

Quote :

"it's still far easier than predicting how many hurricanes will occur in a given season. "

so??

Quote :

"we can't perform experiments to know lots of things, but we can draw conclusions based on evidence."

we can also jump to false conclusions based on misunderstanding and lack of evidence

[Edited on May 22, 2007 at 4:51 PM. Reason : V the timescale for the trends we've studied is minimal]

5/22/2007 4:50:13 PM

We have trends. Highly correlated trends which have held true in the past and continue to hold true each year.

5/22/2007 4:50:14 PM

Quote :

"do you know how we know things like if you flip a coin 10,000 times, its probably going to land on each heads and tails about 5,000 times each? because we performed those experiments "

lol

thats pretty funny.

I don't need to flip a coin 10,000 times to know that its gonna land on heads about 50% of the time.

If you do, then you really shouldn't be discussing this topic.

5/22/2007 4:51:48 PM

Quote :

"so?? "

ummmm

Quote :

"i really don't see how you can admit that hurricanes are difficult to predict and next week's weather is difficult to predict, yet somehow we have a much better ability to predict long term climate changes "

5/22/2007 4:52:23 PM

Quote :

"I don't need to flip a coin 10,000 times to know that its gonna land on heads about 50% of the time. If you do, then you really shouldn't be discussing this topic"

the point is, you can perform this experiment and be certain...not only does intuition/common sense say "2 options...50/50...etc", but we can physically test this to confirm...what exactly can we do to test a few thousand years worth of climate activity? Just speculate like you I suppose

^

Quote :

"it's still far easier than predicting how many hurricanes will occur in a given season"

how can you say that? any followup other than "ummmmmm"?

5/22/2007 4:53:55 PM

Predicting what will happen on something that is pretty much a closed system will always be much easier than predicting the conditions of a fluid over a certain area.

5/22/2007 5:12:02 PM

^^you said "so???" like my claim that it was easier to predict climate than hurricanes was irrelevant, when in fact you said the exact opposite in the quote i posted.

5/22/2007 5:47:26 PM

Quote :

"For those that don't want to read all this, I'll summarize: 'I am too much of a pussy to show my face to this website."

Blind Hate

Quote :

"^says the alias with no pictures in his gallery"

TreeTwista10

LOL! This was the perfect response.

5/23/2007 3:09:25 AM

Quote :

"For those that don't want to read all this, I'll summarize: "I am too much of a pussy to show my face to this website.""

He was a TA for STS 322 and is in his 40s, and his initials might actually be JD. It shouldn't be too hard to track him down, if you wanted to egg his house or something.

5/23/2007 3:16:39 AM

^

Quote :

"He was is a TA for STS 322 and is in his 40s 40, and his initials might actually be are JD. It shouldn't be too hard to track him down, if you wanted to egg his house or something."

I can be seen IRL most anytime; I'm not hard to find. But if anybody eggs my townhouse, you will see me IRL--and I promise you that it won't be a pleasant experience.



[Edited on May 23, 2007 at 3:28 AM. Reason : .]

5/23/2007 3:24:51 AM

Quote :

"says the alias with no pictures in his gallery"

^^^^ well, yeah, but Blind Hate does not attack people based on physical characteristics of personal photos.

Hooksaw does. Routinely.

at least to myself, and State409c, and a few others i've seen but cant remember the names of offhand.

look, putting up a pic is a personal choice. i dont hold it against anyone who wants to remain anonymous for whatever reason. plenty of people put their pics up, plenty dont.

but if youre going to go around and mock people because of their photos, and make claims about your own self that are not verifiable

well then i call bullshit.

if youre gonna troll anonymously, thats fine. i'll troll out in the open. thats fine too. but dont try and clown me for being out in the open, implying that you're superior, while remaining hidden the whole time.

so put your fucking picture up, or shut the hell up.

and dont tell me about your fears of "being photoshopped beside a bag of dicks"






[Edited on May 23, 2007 at 3:32 AM. Reason : ]

5/23/2007 3:28:37 AM

^ Who cares what you think, man? I only attacked you fuckers about your appearance because you did it to me first--I must've really hit a nerve with you, though. You've been howling like a fucking scalded cat about it.

I also made you an offer to stop all ad homs, but you refused. Shall I post the PM?

And I don't troll ANYBODY, goddammit! There is not one person here that is important enough for me to follow from thread to thread harassing. Some users continually clash in TSB threads simply because of their opposing sociopolitical viewpoints. I can assure you that it's nothing more than this to me. Having posted that, I don't like getting personally attacked any more than the next person. So, I often respond in kind--what of it?

Stop whining all the goddamned time, man. It's [old]--just as you often refer to me, am I right?

PS: And it's not just about the potential for manipulated pics. I am also trying to maintain some level of anonymity due to my position at State--which is probably the same reason Blind Hate doesn't have pics up. If you can't understand that, schmoe, too bad.



[Edited on May 23, 2007 at 3:56 AM. Reason : .]

5/23/2007 3:41:16 AM