Canada Kicks Ass
Scientists say get ready for a hotter planet

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



Blue_Nose @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:19 am

PluggyRug PluggyRug:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?


One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value.
One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
I assume we're discussing the same graph:
Image
5-year means are determined by taking the mean temperature over a 5-year period.

I would have thought that was fairly obvious, but I'm less and less surprised by the lack of awareness of the topic from people around here.

   



ManifestDestiny @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:28 am

BartSimpson BartSimpson:
ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:
I will be like Nostrodamus abnd predict there will be a major catastrophie in a major city some where in the world in the next decade. :roll:


OMG!!!! 8O

We should give all our money to the UN because of this!!!!



Bart I am a step ahead of you I already have, I am now moving into a abbandoned bus in Alaska, With little or no food. Wonder what will happen to me? :lol:

   



sasquatch2 @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:29 am

Blue_Nose

$1:
Tsk, tsk - still never bothered to actually determine what the term "anomaly" actually means, did you? That might explain why you abandoned the other thread when I showed up, but continue to spout your ignorance here.

That post explains a lot. I was unaware I abandoned anything---least of all to you....however I derive little pleasure from a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

The only purpose for the "anomaly scale" was to misrepresent it as a temperature trend. Meanwhile that "anomaly" scale was meaningless in that it failed to designate the basis---or mean temperature.

Unfortunately, you are not an anomaly---their seems to be no shortage of rude posters who continue make personal attacks in the absence of evidence. You can get a card for that doncha know.

   



xerxes @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:30 am

Sean Penn will make a movie about you.

   



ManifestDestiny @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:31 am

xerxes xerxes:
Sean Penn will make a movie about you.



Ya think? that would be great. you could make such idiocy heroic!

   



ManifestDestiny @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:33 am

Reuters - Tuesday, March 18MONTREAL - Several dozen schools were expected to remain shut this week in the Canadian province of Quebec over fears their roofs may collapse under the weight of near record amounts of snow, officials said on Monday.



Administrators at Montreal's French-language school board said only 73 of the roughly 200 schools shut since Friday will reopen on Tuesday.

Some of the others may not open until after the four-day Easter weekend, which begins Friday.

"The objective, of course, is to open the maximum of schools but at the same time to proceed carefully because we want there to be zero risk," school board president Diane de Courcy told reporters.

All told, 90,000 students have been out of school in the Montreal area since Friday.

Primary and secondary schools and adult education centres will reopen only once their roofs have been cleared of snow and the buildings have been inspected for structural safety, de Courcy said.

Four people have been killed in the mainly French-speaking Canadian province of 7.6 million after roofs collapsed under the weight of accumulated snow, though none of the incidents involved schools.

In Shawinigan, about 150 kilometres northeast of Montreal, a 55-year-old man died on Saturday when the roof of his home collapsed.

Three women were killed in Morin Heights north of Montreal last Wednesday when part of a food warehouse roof caved in under the weight of snow.

To date, some 350 centimetres of snow has fallen in the Montreal area, approaching a record level of 383 centimetres set in 1971.

Despite periods of rain over the past few weeks, some school roofs have three meters of accumulated snow, school board officials said. About 300 workers were using shovels, scoops and even chainsaws to cut through the snow and ice.

There has been even more snowfall in Quebec's outlying areas. The Mont Orford ski hill about 120 kilometres to the east of Montreal has had 527 centimetres of snowfall since the beginning of the season.

Those seeking updates on the Montreal school closures can visit the school board's Web site at: www.csdm.qc.ca or call 514-897-4444.

   



ManifestDestiny @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:35 am

Al Gore should visit and preach the inconvienentt truth in Montreal.

Think they mioght Tar and feather him right about now!

   



Blue_Nose @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:19 pm

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
That post explains a lot. I was unaware I abandoned anything---least of all to you....however I derive little pleasure from a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
Ah yes, you've certainly demonstrated your vast knowledge of the subject - I was especially swayed by your argument that 1°C is twice as warm as 0.5°C - maybe you should apply for a job with NASA.

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
The only purpose for the "anomaly scale" was to misrepresent it as a temperature trend. Meanwhile that "anomaly" scale was meaningless in that it failed to designate the basis---or mean temperature.
Temperature anomalies are temperature measurements - that you don't understand what they are or why they're used is your problem, especially since you've still yet to even attempt to figure that out.

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
Unfortunately, you are not an anomaly---their seems to be no shortage of rude posters who continue make personal attacks in the absence of evidence. You can get a card for that doncha know.
Unfortunately there's no card for being a moron, and until you actually gather the integrity to defend your claims, I'll post whatever insults I like about you.

   



Bacardi4206 @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:28 pm

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:
Al Gore should visit and preach the inconvienentt truth in Montreal.

Think they mioght Tar and feather him right about now!


Great, Another Al Gore joke :roll:. Keep going, it isn't getting tiering at all.

   



PluggyRug @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:28 pm

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?


One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value.
One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
I assume we're discussing the same graph:
Image
5-year means are determined by taking the mean temperature over a 5-year period.

I would have thought that was fairly obvious, but I'm less and less surprised by the lack of awareness of the topic from people around here.



I'm referring to the "0" as the "mean", not the 5 year time periods. How was the zero mean derived about which the graph is vertically centered.

   



Blue_Nose @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:34 pm

PluggyRug PluggyRug:
I'm referring to the "0" as the "mean", not the 5 year time periods. How was the zero mean derived about which the graph is vertically centered.
In 1744, the Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus developed a scale based on the work of Anders Celsius, where zero represented the melting point of ice and 100 represented water’s boiling point.

Apparently you're in the same boat as samsquanch - that is, unable to comprehend a simple graph. 0°C means 0°C, full stop, end of story.

   



BartSimpson @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:40 pm

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
I'm referring to the "0" as the "mean", not the 5 year time periods. How was the zero mean derived about which the graph is vertically centered.
In 1744, the Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus developed a scale based on the work of Anders Celsius, where zero represented the melting point of ice and 100 represented water’s boiling point.

Apparently you're in the same boat as samsquanch - that is, unable to comprehend a simple graph. 0°C means 0°C, full stop, end of story.


I amazed. You really don't understand what he's talking about, do you?

   



Blue_Nose @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:49 pm

BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
I'm referring to the "0" as the "mean", not the 5 year time periods. How was the zero mean derived about which the graph is vertically centered.
In 1744, the Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus developed a scale based on the work of Anders Celsius, where zero represented the melting point of ice and 100 represented water’s boiling point.

Apparently you're in the same boat as samsquanch - that is, unable to comprehend a simple graph. 0°C means 0°C, full stop, end of story.


I amazed. You really don't understand what he's talking about, do you?
Yes - he thinks "0" represents some "mean" temperature - but it doesn't.

If I went outside today and measured the temperature and it was 0°C, I would put a little dot on that graph at "0" - there's no other scale than the one the plain old thermometer uses.

0°C on the graph is just like 0°C on the thermometer.

Similarly (and this may be a little advanced at this point, but) 1°C on the graph is 1°C from the thermometer.

I can't think of any simpler way to explain it. I'm amazed that all you fools haven't the foggiest notion what you've actually been arguing against this whole time.

   



PluggyRug @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:09 pm

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
I'm amazed that all you fools haven't the foggiest notion what you've actually been arguing against this whole time.


Not arguing against it but attempting to understand.

Sorry that all us fools are somewhat below your perceived intellect.

Oh... you forgot to add the air pressure at which Celsius scale was derived.

   



Blue_Nose @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:19 pm

PluggyRug PluggyRug:
Not arguing against it but attempting to understand.

Sorry that all us fools are somewhat below your perceived intellect.

Oh... you forgot to add the air pressure at which Celsius scale was derived.
Shouldn't that attempt to understand something come before the incessant mockery?

I've never once claimed to be an authority on the subject of climate change, and I in fact know pretty dick all about it. That being said, I make even the most casual attempt to investigate these issues and it shows that you've not once bothered to take the time yourselves - even when it comes down to the most basic of concepts like understanding what data is being presented.

It's a joke to me to be so lacking of personal integrity, and the constant snubbing of scientific research earns you no sympathy, so forgive me if I don't give you the respect you feel you deserve on this issue.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next