Step 9
in [Golf]
|
Prev: health care
Next: adams speedline fast 10 driver
From: William Clark on 1 Mar 2010 14:00 In article <7v2bv0Ft5qU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > news:clark-E63C85.11305601032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <7v265iFpusU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > >> news:clark-2D0495.09414101032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article <MPG.25f58754bb4eb8a4989c75(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> In article <clark-BE9104.07594701032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >> >> state.edu>, clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > >> >> > > >> >> > In article <4b8ba5d2$0$12442$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> > > news:495e3abc-6246-4cee-a8d9-32378b265f8d(a)q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.c > >> >> > > om. > >> >> > > .. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Find me one climatologists who says his model is absolute. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ************************************************** > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Al Gore, William Clark. > >> >> > > >> >> > 0 for 2 again. Neither of us is a climatologist, neither claims the > >> >> > models to be "absolute". > >> >> > > >> >> > Sigh. > >> >> > >> >> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7332803/ > >> >> A-perfect-storm-is-brewing-for-the-IPCC.html > >> >> > >> >> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870423130457509209092414034 > >> >> 2.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection > >> >> > >> >> Billy it appears that the walls are crumbling. > >> >> > >> >> The question now becomes when were the "errors" introduced and how > >> >> deep > >> >> are they now. > >> > > >> > Again, simply more denialist screaming from the friends of the right. > >> > Both these rags have been firmly lodged on that side since day 1. Why > >> > should anyone expect any different take from them? > >> > >> And more alarmist screaming from you. > > > > Where? > > Research by hurricane scientists may force the UN's climate panel to > reconsider its claims that greenhouse gas emissions have caused an increase > in the number of tropical storms. > > The benchmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change > (IPCC) said that a worldwide increase in hurricane-force storms since 1970 > was probably linked to global warming. > > It followed some of the most damaging storms in history such as Hurricane > Katrina, which hit New Orleans and Hurricane Dennis which hit Cuba, both in > 2005. > > The IPCC added that humanity could expect a big increase in such storms over > the 21st century unless greenhouse gas emissions were controlled. > > The warning helped turn hurricanes into one of the most iconic threats of > global warming, with politicians including Ed Miliband, the energy > secretary, and Al Gore citing them as a growing threat to humanity. > > However, the latest research, just published in Nature Geoscience, paints a > very different picture. > > It suggests that the rise in hurricane frequency since 1995 was just part of > a natural cycle, and that several similar previous increases have been > recorded, each followed by a decline. > > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modelling to predict that > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. > > It does, however, suggest that when tropical storms do occur they could get > slightly stronger, with average windspeeds rising by 2-11% by 2100. A storm > is termed a hurricane when wind speeds exceed 74mph, but most are much > stronger. A category 4 or 5 hurricane such as Katrina generates speeds in > excess of 150mph. > > "We have come to substantially different conclusions from the IPCC," said > Chris Landsea, a lead scientist at the American government's National > Hurricane Center, who co-authored the report. > > He added: "There are a lot of legitimate concerns about climate change but, > in my opinion, hurricanes are not among them. We are looking at a decrease > in frequency and a small increase in severity." Landsea said he regarded the > use of hurricane icons on the cover of Gore's book as "misleading". Given that this is more than one sentence long, and technical, it is absolutely certain that you did not write it. Laws of copyright, and elementary scientific ethics, require that anyone posting stuff like this gives the source. Shame on you. And it has absolutely nothing to do with backing up your claims of my alleged "alarmist screamings". No surprise there, either.
From: John B. on 1 Mar 2010 16:21 On Mar 1, 12:31 pm, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > news:clark-E63C85.11305601032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > > In article <7v265iFpu...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > >> "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > >>news:clark-2D0495.09414101032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article <MPG.25f58754bb4eb8a4989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > >> >> In article <clark-BE9104.07594701032...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >> >> state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > >> >> > In article <4b8ba5d2$0$12442$bbae4...(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> > >news:495e3abc-6246-4cee-a8d9-32378b265f8d(a)q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com. > >> >> > > .. > > >> >> > > Find me one climatologists who says his model is absolute. > > >> >> > > ************************************************** > > >> >> > > Al Gore, William Clark. > > >> >> > 0 for 2 again. Neither of us is a climatologist, neither claims the > >> >> > models to be "absolute". > > >> >> > Sigh. > > >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7332803/ > >> >> A-perfect-storm-is-brewing-for-the-IPCC.html > > >> >>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870423130457509209092414034 > >> >> 2.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection > > >> >> Billy it appears that the walls are crumbling. > > >> >> The question now becomes when were the "errors" introduced and how > >> >> deep > >> >> are they now. > > >> > Again, simply more denialist screaming from the friends of the right.. > >> > Both these rags have been firmly lodged on that side since day 1. Why > >> > should anyone expect any different take from them? > > >> And more alarmist screaming from you. > > > Where? > > Research by hurricane scientists may force the UN's climate panel to > reconsider its claims that greenhouse gas emissions have caused an increase > in the number of tropical storms. > > The benchmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change > (IPCC) said that a worldwide increase in hurricane-force storms since 1970 > was probably linked to global warming. > > It followed some of the most damaging storms in history such as Hurricane > Katrina, which hit New Orleans and Hurricane Dennis which hit Cuba, both in > 2005. > > The IPCC added that humanity could expect a big increase in such storms over > the 21st century unless greenhouse gas emissions were controlled. > > The warning helped turn hurricanes into one of the most iconic threats of > global warming, with politicians including Ed Miliband, the energy > secretary, and Al Gore citing them as a growing threat to humanity. > > However, the latest research, just published in Nature Geoscience, paints a > very different picture. > > It suggests that the rise in hurricane frequency since 1995 was just part of > a natural cycle, and that several similar previous increases have been > recorded, each followed by a decline. > > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modelling to predict that > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. > > It does, however, suggest that when tropical storms do occur they could get > slightly stronger, with average windspeeds rising by 2-11% by 2100. A storm > is termed a hurricane when wind speeds exceed 74mph, but most are much > stronger. A category 4 or 5 hurricane such as Katrina generates speeds in > excess of 150mph. > > "We have come to substantially different conclusions from the IPCC," said > Chris Landsea, a lead scientist at the American government's National > Hurricane Center, who co-authored the report. > > He added: "There are a lot of legitimate concerns about climate change but, > in my opinion, hurricanes are not among them. We are looking at a decrease > in frequency and a small increase in severity." Landsea said he regarded the > use of hurricane icons on the cover of Gore's book as "misleading". I assume this is from Newsmax or some equally credible news outlet. The IPCC predicted in 2007 an increase in coastal storm severity, but not frequency.
From: MNMikeW on 1 Mar 2010 16:56 "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:e3601d5d-61dd-4dda-befa-ee93ab8a19a7(a)g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... On Mar 1, 12:31 pm, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > news:clark-E63C85.11305601032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > > In article <7v265iFpu...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > >> "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > >>news:clark-2D0495.09414101032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article <MPG.25f58754bb4eb8a4989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > >> >> In article <clark-BE9104.07594701032...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >> >> state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > >> >> > In article <4b8ba5d2$0$12442$bbae4...(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> > >news:495e3abc-6246-4cee-a8d9-32378b265f8d(a)q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com. > >> >> > > .. > > >> >> > > Find me one climatologists who says his model is absolute. > > >> >> > > ************************************************** > > >> >> > > Al Gore, William Clark. > > >> >> > 0 for 2 again. Neither of us is a climatologist, neither claims > >> >> > the > >> >> > models to be "absolute". > > >> >> > Sigh. > > >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7332803/ > >> >> A-perfect-storm-is-brewing-for-the-IPCC.html > > >> >>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870423130457509209092414034 > >> >> 2.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection > > >> >> Billy it appears that the walls are crumbling. > > >> >> The question now becomes when were the "errors" introduced and how > >> >> deep > >> >> are they now. > > >> > Again, simply more denialist screaming from the friends of the right. > >> > Both these rags have been firmly lodged on that side since day 1. Why > >> > should anyone expect any different take from them? > > >> And more alarmist screaming from you. > > > Where? > > Research by hurricane scientists may force the UN's climate panel to > reconsider its claims that greenhouse gas emissions have caused an > increase > in the number of tropical storms. > > The benchmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change > (IPCC) said that a worldwide increase in hurricane-force storms since 1970 > was probably linked to global warming. > > It followed some of the most damaging storms in history such as Hurricane > Katrina, which hit New Orleans and Hurricane Dennis which hit Cuba, both > in > 2005. > > The IPCC added that humanity could expect a big increase in such storms > over > the 21st century unless greenhouse gas emissions were controlled. > > The warning helped turn hurricanes into one of the most iconic threats of > global warming, with politicians including Ed Miliband, the energy > secretary, and Al Gore citing them as a growing threat to humanity. > > However, the latest research, just published in Nature Geoscience, paints > a > very different picture. > > It suggests that the rise in hurricane frequency since 1995 was just part > of > a natural cycle, and that several similar previous increases have been > recorded, each followed by a decline. > > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modelling to predict that > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. > > It does, however, suggest that when tropical storms do occur they could > get > slightly stronger, with average windspeeds rising by 2-11% by 2100. A > storm > is termed a hurricane when wind speeds exceed 74mph, but most are much > stronger. A category 4 or 5 hurricane such as Katrina generates speeds in > excess of 150mph. > > "We have come to substantially different conclusions from the IPCC," said > Chris Landsea, a lead scientist at the American government's National > Hurricane Center, who co-authored the report. > > He added: "There are a lot of legitimate concerns about climate change > but, > in my opinion, hurricanes are not among them. We are looking at a decrease > in frequency and a small increase in severity." Landsea said he regarded > the > use of hurricane icons on the cover of Gore's book as "misleading". I assume this is from Newsmax or some equally credible news outlet. The IPCC predicted in 2007 an increase in coastal storm severity, but not frequency. ====================== http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7044158.ece
From: Moderate on 1 Mar 2010 17:18 "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:e3601d5d-61dd-4dda-befa-ee93ab8a19a7(a)g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... On Mar 1, 12:31 pm, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > news:clark-E63C85.11305601032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > > In article <7v265iFpu...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > >> "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > >>news:clark-2D0495.09414101032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article <MPG.25f58754bb4eb8a4989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > >> > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > >> >> In article <clark-BE9104.07594701032...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >> >> state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > >> >> > In article <4b8ba5d2$0$12442$bbae4...(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> > >news:495e3abc-6246-4cee-a8d9-32378b265f8d(a)q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com. > >> >> > > .. > > >> >> > > Find me one climatologists who says his model is absolute. > > >> >> > > ************************************************** > > >> >> > > Al Gore, William Clark. > > >> >> > 0 for 2 again. Neither of us is a climatologist, neither claims > >> >> > the > >> >> > models to be "absolute". > > >> >> > Sigh. > > >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7332803/ > >> >> A-perfect-storm-is-brewing-for-the-IPCC.html > > >> >>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870423130457509209092414034 > >> >> 2.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection > > >> >> Billy it appears that the walls are crumbling. > > >> >> The question now becomes when were the "errors" introduced and how > >> >> deep > >> >> are they now. > > >> > Again, simply more denialist screaming from the friends of the right. > >> > Both these rags have been firmly lodged on that side since day 1. Why > >> > should anyone expect any different take from them? > > >> And more alarmist screaming from you. > > > Where? > > Research by hurricane scientists may force the UN's climate panel to > reconsider its claims that greenhouse gas emissions have caused an > increase > in the number of tropical storms. > > The benchmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change > (IPCC) said that a worldwide increase in hurricane-force storms since 1970 > was probably linked to global warming. > > It followed some of the most damaging storms in history such as Hurricane > Katrina, which hit New Orleans and Hurricane Dennis which hit Cuba, both > in > 2005. > > The IPCC added that humanity could expect a big increase in such storms > over > the 21st century unless greenhouse gas emissions were controlled. > > The warning helped turn hurricanes into one of the most iconic threats of > global warming, with politicians including Ed Miliband, the energy > secretary, and Al Gore citing them as a growing threat to humanity. > > However, the latest research, just published in Nature Geoscience, paints > a > very different picture. > > It suggests that the rise in hurricane frequency since 1995 was just part > of > a natural cycle, and that several similar previous increases have been > recorded, each followed by a decline. > > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modelling to predict that > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. > > It does, however, suggest that when tropical storms do occur they could > get > slightly stronger, with average windspeeds rising by 2-11% by 2100. A > storm > is termed a hurricane when wind speeds exceed 74mph, but most are much > stronger. A category 4 or 5 hurricane such as Katrina generates speeds in > excess of 150mph. > > "We have come to substantially different conclusions from the IPCC," said > Chris Landsea, a lead scientist at the American government's National > Hurricane Center, who co-authored the report. > > He added: "There are a lot of legitimate concerns about climate change > but, > in my opinion, hurricanes are not among them. We are looking at a decrease > in frequency and a small increase in severity." Landsea said he regarded > the > use of hurricane icons on the cover of Gore's book as "misleading". I assume this is from Newsmax or some equally credible news outlet. The IPCC predicted in 2007 an increase in coastal storm severity, but not frequency. **************************************************** Maybe I misread this part of the article: > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modeling to predict that > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. It looks like the article agrees with the IPCC report.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 1 Mar 2010 17:18
On Mar 1, 4:56 pm, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:e3601d5d-61dd-4dda-befa-ee93ab8a19a7(a)g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 1, 12:31 pm, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > >news:clark-E63C85.11305601032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > In article <7v265iFpu...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > >>news:clark-2D0495.09414101032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > >> > In article <MPG.25f58754bb4eb8a4989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > >> > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > >> >> In article <clark-BE9104.07594701032...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > >> >> state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > >> >> > In article <4b8ba5d2$0$12442$bbae4...(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > > >> >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > > > >> >> > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >> >> > >news:495e3abc-6246-4cee-a8d9-32378b265f8d(a)q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com. > > >> >> > > .. > > > >> >> > > Find me one climatologists who says his model is absolute. > > > >> >> > > ************************************************** > > > >> >> > > Al Gore, William Clark. > > > >> >> > 0 for 2 again. Neither of us is a climatologist, neither claims > > >> >> > the > > >> >> > models to be "absolute". > > > >> >> > Sigh. > > > >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7332803/ > > >> >> A-perfect-storm-is-brewing-for-the-IPCC.html > > > >> >>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870423130457509209092414034 > > >> >> 2.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection > > > >> >> Billy it appears that the walls are crumbling. > > > >> >> The question now becomes when were the "errors" introduced and how > > >> >> deep > > >> >> are they now. > > > >> > Again, simply more denialist screaming from the friends of the right. > > >> > Both these rags have been firmly lodged on that side since day 1. Why > > >> > should anyone expect any different take from them? > > > >> And more alarmist screaming from you. > > > > Where? > > > Research by hurricane scientists may force the UN's climate panel to > > reconsider its claims that greenhouse gas emissions have caused an > > increase > > in the number of tropical storms. > > > The benchmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change > > (IPCC) said that a worldwide increase in hurricane-force storms since 1970 > > was probably linked to global warming. > > > It followed some of the most damaging storms in history such as Hurricane > > Katrina, which hit New Orleans and Hurricane Dennis which hit Cuba, both > > in > > 2005. > > > The IPCC added that humanity could expect a big increase in such storms > > over > > the 21st century unless greenhouse gas emissions were controlled. > > > The warning helped turn hurricanes into one of the most iconic threats of > > global warming, with politicians including Ed Miliband, the energy > > secretary, and Al Gore citing them as a growing threat to humanity. > > > However, the latest research, just published in Nature Geoscience, paints > > a > > very different picture. > > > It suggests that the rise in hurricane frequency since 1995 was just part > > of > > a natural cycle, and that several similar previous increases have been > > recorded, each followed by a decline. > > > Looking to the future, it also draws on computer modelling to predict that > > the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency > > of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100. > > > It does, however, suggest that when tropical storms do occur they could > > get > > slightly stronger, with average windspeeds rising by 2-11% by 2100. A > > storm > > is termed a hurricane when wind speeds exceed 74mph, but most are much > > stronger. A category 4 or 5 hurricane such as Katrina generates speeds in > > excess of 150mph. > > > "We have come to substantially different conclusions from the IPCC," said > > Chris Landsea, a lead scientist at the American government's National > > Hurricane Center, who co-authored the report. > > > He added: "There are a lot of legitimate concerns about climate change > > but, > > in my opinion, hurricanes are not among them. We are looking at a decrease > > in frequency and a small increase in severity." Landsea said he regarded > > the > > use of hurricane icons on the cover of Gore's book as "misleading". > > I assume this is from Newsmax or some equally credible news outlet. > The IPCC predicted in 2007 an increase in coastal storm severity, but > not frequency. > ====================== > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7044158.ece Rising sea levels were supposed to drive many people on seacoasts out of their homes by the year 2000. Never happened, nor did the increase in storm activity...although you could probably find some measure of storm activity that increased...and some other that decreased...which gets you what, exactly? |