Ocean acidification

[SpidermanTuba]

Anonymity? What you think someone here can track you down because you claimed you worked at Flagstaff? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

It wouldn't be hard. There were only two people with my job and one was a woman and one was me.

Gimme a break douchebag.... A sky survey? LOL, what one? You realize thats as general a claim you can make on that? A telescope is in effect a survey of celestial bodies... Sorry google boy but I'm not buying it..... So you didn't work on the NPOI? Or is that too sensitive to talk about? HAHAHAHAAHA!

I don't believe you understand what a sky survey is. You can read all about them on the internets. Google

Every time it never fails; every time you assholes get into a debate you can't win in your usual ignorant way, you immediately turn into some kind of scientific expert in the field.

I had no idea this debate was over astrophysics!

 

[westwall]

You know you are still ducking my question about the effects volcanoes have on our atmosphere. So to reiterate, a single large volcanic eruption has measurable, verifiable effects on the Earths atmosphere. And yet even though man is (according to you) pumping vastly more pollutants into the atmosphere there is no measurable effect. Why is that?

And please don't trot out any of those fraudulent graphs that Old Fraud loves to pony out.
And don't bore us with "well we may see this" or "it is possible that..." or "computer models suggest". No, I want to see something verifiable and I want to see it right now. A volcanoes effects are nearly instantaneous. You don't have to wait years or decades for the effects to be observed.

Please oh great "Astrophysicist" explain that to us poor mortals.

Anonymity? What you think someone here can track you down because you claimed you worked at Flagstaff? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

It wouldn't be hard. There were only two people with my job and one was a woman and one was me.

Gimme a break douchebag.... A sky survey? LOL, what one? You realize thats as general a claim you can make on that? A telescope is in effect a survey of celestial bodies... Sorry google boy but I'm not buying it..... So you didn't work on the NPOI? Or is that too sensitive to talk about? HAHAHAHAAHA!

I don't believe you understand what a sky survey is. You can read all about them on the internets. Google

Every time it never fails; every time you assholes get into a debate you can't win in your usual ignorant way, you immediately turn into some kind of scientific expert in the field.

I had no idea this debate was over astrophysics!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

You know you are still ducking my question about the effects volcanoes have on our atmosphere. So to reiterate, a single large volcanic eruption has measurable, verifiable effects on the Earths atmosphere.


And yet even though man is (according to you) pumping vastly more pollutants into the atmosphere there is no measurable effect. Why is that?

Please point out where on this graph you can find evidence that a single large volcanic eruption has a measurable affect on the atmospheric CO2 content.

No, I want to see something verifiable and I want to see it right now.

OK. Radiative Climate Forcing by the Mount Pinatubo Eruption -- Minnis et al. 259 (5100): 1411 -- Science

A volcanoes effects are nearly instantaneous. You don't have to wait years or decades for the effects to be observed.

Please oh great "Astrophysicist" explain that to us poor mortals.

You want me to explain to you why the effects of a volcanic eruption on the atmosphere are nearly instantaneous? Aren't you the supposed geologist?

 

[westwall]

No Silly person,

What I am saying is when a volcano erupts there is an immediate effect (one example is in general the temperature falls for a year and sometimes longer) and yet the amount of pollutants is tiny compared to what man is doing...(once again according to you) so please explain this dichotomy.

If what we are doing is so damned dire then why the hell are there no effects visible or measurable? Huh?

Simple question, should have a simple answer now don't you think?

Oh yes anything published by NOAA for the moment is suspect. Their data has been proven as useless as the CRU's.
Hopefully when they get a non-agenda driven director things will revert to good science again.

And Eyjafjallajokull by itself is pumping as much CO2 into the atmosphere as Belgium is all by itself....but oh yeah I forgot...it's natural CO2 and not man made so it doesn't count...oooops oh goofy meee...

You know you are still ducking my question about the effects volcanoes have on our atmosphere. So to reiterate, a single large volcanic eruption has measurable, verifiable effects on the Earths atmosphere.


And yet even though man is (according to you) pumping vastly more pollutants into the atmosphere there is no measurable effect. Why is that?

Please point out where on this graph you can find evidence that a single large volcanic eruption has a measurable affect on the atmospheric CO2 content.

No, I want to see something verifiable and I want to see it right now.

OK. Radiative Climate Forcing by the Mount Pinatubo Eruption -- Minnis et al. 259 (5100): 1411 -- Science

A volcanoes effects are nearly instantaneous. You don't have to wait years or decades for the effects to be observed.

Please oh great "Astrophysicist" explain that to us poor mortals.

You want me to explain to you why the effects of a volcanic eruption on the atmosphere are nearly instantaneous? Aren't you the supposed geologist?

 

[gslack]

Anonymity? What you think someone here can track you down because you claimed you worked at Flagstaff? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

It wouldn't be hard. There were only two people with my job and one was a woman and one was me.

Gimme a break douchebag.... A sky survey? LOL, what one? You realize thats as general a claim you can make on that? A telescope is in effect a survey of celestial bodies... Sorry google boy but I'm not buying it..... So you didn't work on the NPOI? Or is that too sensitive to talk about? HAHAHAHAAHA!

I don't believe you understand what a sky survey is. You can read all about them on the internets. Google

Every time it never fails; every time you assholes get into a debate you can't win in your usual ignorant way, you immediately turn into some kind of scientific expert in the field.

I had no idea this debate was over astrophysics!

On the INTERNETS okay buddy I will look on the internets I am sure one of them will have something on it......

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I also happen to know your little attempts to be a douchebag prove my point....

One more fake....

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oh yes anything published by NOAA for the moment is suspect.

According to who?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

 

[gslack]

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

BULLSHIT!!!!!

You are full of it not just a little bit but epically full of shit!

THe navy would not allow that, all military operations are redundant upon redundant, and all technical/technological/scientific research and so on are even more so. you can claim it was a one man job all you want pal , but its just more proof you are talking out you're ass..

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

BULLSHIT!!!!!

You are full of it not just a little bit but epically full of shit!

THe navy would not allow that, all military operations are redundant upon redundant, and all technical/technological/scientific research and so on are even more so. you can claim it was a one man job all you want pal , but its just more proof you are talking out you're ass..

I'm not seeing what redundancy was needed here that wasn't used. We backed up our data in triplicate, that's pretty redundant I'd say. But I guess you're the expert on EVERYTHING so you'd know better. You should write the U.S. Naval Observatory and inform them that telescopes are two man operations and that they need to spend the extra cash to have someone sit on his ass all night long.

 

[gslack]

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

BULLSHIT!!!!!

You are full of it not just a little bit but epically full of shit!

THe navy would not allow that, all military operations are redundant upon redundant, and all technical/technological/scientific research and so on are even more so. you can claim it was a one man job all you want pal , but its just more proof you are talking out you're ass..

I'm not seeing what redundancy was needed here that wasn't used. We backed up our data in triplicate, that's pretty redundant I'd say. But I guess you're the expert on EVERYTHING so you'd know better. You should write the U.S. Naval Observatory and inform them that telescopes are two man operations and that they need to spend the extra cash to have someone sit on his ass all night long.

Asshole, I know how the military and especially the DON works. I been working with them off an on as a contractor and regular gov employee for 21 years now. Redundancy involves more than backing up your data dumazz, and had you actually worked for the Dept. of the Navy you would know this. personnel are not left to their own devices. Not even douchebag internet fake astrophysicist like you....

 

[SpidermanTuba]

BULLSHIT!!!!!

You are full of it not just a little bit but epically full of shit!

THe navy would not allow that, all military operations are redundant upon redundant, and all technical/technological/scientific research and so on are even more so. you can claim it was a one man job all you want pal , but its just more proof you are talking out you're ass..

I'm not seeing what redundancy was needed here that wasn't used. We backed up our data in triplicate, that's pretty redundant I'd say. But I guess you're the expert on EVERYTHING so you'd know better. You should write the U.S. Naval Observatory and inform them that telescopes are two man operations and that they need to spend the extra cash to have someone sit on his ass all night long.

Asshole, I know how the military and especially the DON works. I been working with them off an on as a contractor and regular gov employee for 21 years now. Redundancy involves more than backing up your data dumazz, and had you actually worked for the Dept. of the Navy you would know this. personnel are not left to their own devices. Not even douchebag internet fake astrophysicist like you....

I didn't know the Navy contracted out its janitorial duties.

Please, by all means, tell me how I should have done my job. Obviously, since you've done contract work with the navy on and off, you must know everything about every job, military and civilian, within the Navy, even more than the people actually doing the job.


I have to ask though, since you're such an expert on everything having to do with the Navy, shouldn't you be busy helping out with this oil spill? Get the fuck outta here Mr. Expert on Everything, we need you to save the day!

 

[gslack]

I'm not seeing what redundancy was needed here that wasn't used. We backed up our data in triplicate, that's pretty redundant I'd say. But I guess you're the expert on EVERYTHING so you'd know better. You should write the U.S. Naval Observatory and inform them that telescopes are two man operations and that they need to spend the extra cash to have someone sit on his ass all night long.

Asshole, I know how the military and especially the DON works. I been working with them off an on as a contractor and regular gov employee for 21 years now. Redundancy involves more than backing up your data dumazz, and had you actually worked for the Dept. of the Navy you would know this. personnel are not left to their own devices. Not even douchebag internet fake astrophysicist like you....

I didn't know the Navy contracted out its janitorial duties.

Please, by all means, tell me how I should have done my job. Obviously, since you've done contract work with the navy on and off, you must know everything about every job, military and civilian, within the Navy, even more than the people actually doing the job.


I have to ask though, since you're such an expert on everything having to do with the Navy, shouldn't you be busy helping out with this oil spill? Get the fuck outta here Mr. Expert on Everything, we need you to save the day!

Aww going to resort to bullhsitting your way out of it now? how very telling there junior...

I am a data analyst, but then you wouldn't know about that would you fake boy...

 

[westwall]

Legitimate scientists

Oh yes anything published by NOAA for the moment is suspect.

According to who?

 

[Big Fitz]

All science based on the falsified data created by East Anglia University, Mann/Jansen/Hansen is hereby invalid because they had to MAKE SHIT UP and massage the numbers (do the trick) to get the results they wanted.

Huh... just wondering something out loud here. When's the last time nature had such a sharp increase in temperature as the purported hockey stick fraud over as many years? I don't think there ever has been that was not attached to a global disaster of some sort, and then it would have been faster or slower. Volcanoes and meteors happen instantly, and solar events usually take place over a much longer period of time, don't they? If there is some non-massaged evidence in that, I'd love to see it.

 

[saveliberty]

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

Congratulations, the sky did not fall on your watch. You did let some aliens sneak in however.

 

[Flopper]

It's a silly pipe dream to think that people are going to make the kind of sacrifices needed to stop the buildup of greenhouse gases. Our society is result orientated. If we make sacrifices we expect a result within some specific time period. Our time horizons are short. Science's time horizons are long. For any massive project, if we don't get real positive results in 5 or 10 years, we are done with it.

The other problem is we are so adaptable. If the polar bears are extinct in 25 years, we will adapt by having lots of them in zoos. If the oceans rise and flood the coasts, we will adapt by moving our cities. If our deserts become uninhabitable, we will to north or south. If the land and ocean can not provide us with food, we will adapt by seeing our numbers sharply reduced. And then greenhouse gases will not be a problem. Over time nature has a way correcting imbalances.

 

[westwall]

Which instrument were you working with? And at the time you were working there how many other scientists were working there?

Oh little man, I am well aware wait a sky survey is tard boy.... I also happen to know your claim to be only one of two doing such is utter and complete bullshit.

I love how you're the world's foremost expert on EVERYTHING!

I also didn't say I was only one of two on the project. I was only one of two telescope operators at the time. Operation of the telescope was a one man operation. There are 12 hours of darkness a night. That's 84 hours of work per week. Two full time workers. Are you suggesting they should have hired 4 part time workers instead? Would that have resulted in a better survey? I ask you because you obviously know everything.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Asshole, I know how the military and especially the DON works. I been working with them off an on as a contractor and regular gov employee for 21 years now. Redundancy involves more than backing up your data dumazz, and had you actually worked for the Dept. of the Navy you would know this. personnel are not left to their own devices. Not even douchebag internet fake astrophysicist like you....

I didn't know the Navy contracted out its janitorial duties.

Please, by all means, tell me how I should have done my job. Obviously, since you've done contract work with the navy on and off, you must know everything about every job, military and civilian, within the Navy, even more than the people actually doing the job.


I have to ask though, since you're such an expert on everything having to do with the Navy, shouldn't you be busy helping out with this oil spill? Get the fuck outta here Mr. Expert on Everything, we need you to save the day!

Aww going to resort to bullhsitting your way out of it now? how very telling there junior...

I am a data analyst, but then you wouldn't know about that would you fake boy...

I wouldn't. I'm not a data analyst. So why should I? I'm not an expert on everything like you are.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Legitimate scientists

Oh yes anything published by NOAA for the moment is suspect.

According to who?

Do any of them have names?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

All science based on the falsified data created by East Anglia University, Mann/Jansen/Hansen is hereby invalid because they had to MAKE SHIT UP and massage the numbers (do the trick) to get the results they wanted.

According to who?