Local Posts #20 (Part One)

2009-6-6 06:22:00

[Compiler's Note: The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog, and were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey on The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group. Because of the length of the original post, the archived version of this post was broken up into multiple parts. This is Part 1 of 2. Links to the remaining parts can be found at the end of this article.]

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #1

Here are some facts on Global Warming:

1934 was the warmest year in the last 100 years. 1998 was second. It hasn't gotten warmer since then.

80-90% of warming involves the oceans rather than atmosphere and the oceans have gotten cooler since 2003 when they began accurate measurements.

In the last 100 years the temperature has changed about one degree which is fairly normal for a 100 year period.

Scientists do not know how much the warming is due to cycles and how much to carbon dioxide (CO2).

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a fertilizer and its increase has made for a greener more fertile planet.

If we spend trillions on emergency control of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions the effect would be negligible, maybe a hundredth of a degree and the negative effect on the economy would delay green technology.

It's been about 11,500 years since the last ice age meaning we are due for another one. A little extra warming from carbon dioxide (CO2) could delay it or lessen its effects. An ice age is much more devastating than global warming.

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #2

"RunStavrosRun" wrote:

"When your first 'fact' is dead wrong, how are we supposed to seriously listen to anything else you have to say? Let me guess, those dingbats over at NASA don't know what they're talking about."

JJ:

My facts we dead on and agrees wit the NASA site. I said that 1998 was the second warmest year and it has not warmed since then. If I am wrong tell which year since 1998 was warmer than 1998?

Here's a quote from the "New York Times":

"NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II."

( http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/hottest-year-data-meltdown/ )

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #3

"RunStavrosRun" wrote:

"I know I'm contradicting the aforementioned placement on my list, but I'll try one more time, Joe:

"Your quote:

"'1934 was the warmest year in the last 100 years.'

"NASA's quote:

"'The ten warmest years all occur within the 12-year period 1997-2008.'

"How hard is this?"

JJ:

Easy. Nothing in my original post disagreed with this.

Why is this simple fact so difficult for you to understand?

The ten warmest years was not even a part of any of my writings. My statement you disagree with was that 1998 was the warmest year in the last 11 years and 1934 was the warmest on record. This is a solid fact stated on the NASA site, yet you disagree.

Why, I do not know.

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #4

"JobeMaha" wrote:

"I guess it depends on who you read and believe. 2005 is being called the hottest with 98 in second."

JJ:

It's not so much who, but when. You are using old data. A short while back a guy in his basement in Canada was reviewing NASA figures and spotted a major calculating error. He sent he figures to NASA and when they checked they discovered he was right and then revised their figures.

The revised NASA figures no longer have 2005 as being the hottest, but that is now 1934 with 1998 coming in second.

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #5

"JobeMaha wrote":

"Actually, it is not old data. It just conflicts with your NASA data. Warming is a fact and for those who can't see it, well good luck. Like I said, it's what YOU read and believe. I believe my sources are correct and you believe yours are and that's ok. Also, it has gotten warmer in 2005."

JJ:

Show me your reference. Why do you believe this over the source "Run" is using? That source from NASA says 1998 and 2007 tie for the warmest years on record meaning we have not had any year warmer than 1998 show up in 11 years.

Now the figures there are about 15 months old so it is quite possible NASA has changed its mind again by now.

James Hansen, the most famous Global Warming alarmist from NASA, has been wrong on every prediction he has made including his prediction of global cooling just before the current warming cycle.

  

May 12, 2009 -- Post #6

"Idaho-Joe" replying to "Boise River" wrote:

"It is amazing how anti-science that Republicans have become. IS that the reason why they continue to under fund education? So because they question faulty science that makes them anti-science?"

JJ:

It's the Left that are anti science or should I say...

They are the equivalent of the dogmatic scientists in the church in the days of Galileo.

Galileo is the equivalent of those today who see an alternative to alarmist global warming dogmas which falsely states "all scientists agree" and the modern day dogmatic ones want to shut him up and refuse to listen to reason.

  

May 13, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

How far must one on the Left cross the line before their people are embarrassed enough to speak up?

Not only did [American stand-up comedian, actress, political activist & writer] Janeane Garofalo demonstrate that there is no apparent limit as long as the hate is directed at the Right but now we have a president, who campaigned on ending the partisan divide, laughing approvingly at [American stand-up comedian and actress] Wanda Sykes death wish for [American radio host and conservative political commentator] Rush Limbaugh. He just didn't give her a polite pass like he does with [US Vice President] Biden but afterward congratulated her on the performance.

And what happens on the Right to offend the Left? Miss California joins the majority of Americans in supporting traditional marriage. This has brought forth as hateful attacks as one can imagine.

Just look at the difference in what offends. The Left attacks with a nationally viewed death wish and a complete lie about the views of the "Tea Party" people. On the Right we have an innocent young girl answering a question as honestly as possible.

[American radio host, humorist, writer, and philanthropist] Don Imus was ostracized and fired for much less offense than from Sykes or Garafalo.

  

May 13, 2009 -- Post #2

"Blarney" wrote:

"[Carrie Prejean], Miss California [USA, 2009] was not in hot water because of her marriage statement (everyone's entitled to their opinion in the country). It's because she breached her contract by lying about nude or semi-nude photos."

JJ:

I wasn't even referring the supposed breach. All the hate surfaced before that came into play.

Do you think every word of her contract would have been scrutinized for wrong doing if she had given the political correct answer?

Of course not.

Hypocrisy?

Yes, lots.

Critics claim she violated the moral clause of the contract with a photo that doesn't even reveal bare breasts.

A view of her in a bikini on television was more racy.

This is hypocrisy of the highest order. Liberals morally offended by a bare back? Give me a break.

See this terrible photo at:

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/05/07/2009-05-07_court_docs_miss_california_usa_carrie_prejean_ used_homosexuality_as_an_insult.html

  

May 13, 2009 -- Post #3

"Camerafan" wrote:

"Joseph, please stop double spacing your replys. You are not double spacing different thoughts -- you are double spacing sentences."

JJ:

Most of my posts (like the first one today) have several sentences per paragraph. Sometimes I make short paragraphs for impact. You can blame that technique on Ray Bradbury for I have carefully studied his writing style and was inspired by his use of paragraphing.

I have written over a dozen books and none of my readers have complained about my use of paragraphs.

You, on the other hand, need to use more paragraphs. Sometimes it is hard to tell where your quote ends and your writing begins.

  

May 13, 2009 -- Post #4

"Boisepoet" wrote:

"The funniest thing about the teabaggers is that taxes haven't been raised yet, and the marginal tax rates for federal income tax are at a post-WWII low."

JJ:

The term "teabagger" refers to sexual act that is insulting to associate with the "Tea Party" people. We are not teabaggers any more than you are a @#$%*!

"Boiseinsulter":

"By the way, do the 'right-wingers' who love Ayn Rand also realize she was an atheist who condemned altruism. Her whole premise was 'rational self-interest', in other words 'selfishness'. So if you are a Christian, how does that reconcile with your theology?"

JJ:

Politics and religion are two separate things. The Right does not demand dogmatic purity as does the Left. We take good ideas wherever we find them.

I would say that Jesus was into self-interest but just had a greater realization of what was good for himself and others.

"Big10-OC":

"According to [Russian-born American philosopher, writer, and novelist] Ayn Rand, you political posters are all racists."

JJ:

Where do you get this idea?

  

-- End Of Part One --

  

Go To:

Next article in series:  Local Posts #20, Part 2
Previous article in series:  Local Posts #19