9918099 / 121 / 121 / 121 / 121 = 0.04626866381

( 4626866381 - 1836686264 ) / 9 = 310020013

31, 11th prime

13, 6th prime

13, 7th fibonacci number

2, 1st prime
, 3rd fibonacci number
, 2nd bell number
, 2nd catalan number

Letter discovered in archives-
Turns out the Aussie hero was conservative white male
establishment fuckhead.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-54-problems-lucifer-rebellion

13045 days

( 54031 - 13045 ) / 9 = 4554

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va7aQJt0Qh8

Tuesday, 27th December 2022, 00:54 UTC, M2.07

Duration: 9288 minutes

( 27122022 - 22022172 ) / 9 / 10 = 56665

56665 * 9288 / 360 = 1461957

( 7591641 - 1461957 ) / 99 = 61916

Yea man!

NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age, and
the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground (t.t.trembling in the
long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
many will release that confined gas in beer cans.

On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
> Yea man!
>
> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,

**No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with GLOBAL
climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW: Not very
much.

and
> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground

**Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.

(t.t.trembling in the
> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?

**Wrong question. The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce
CO2 levels fast enough to avoid complete catastrophe? Complete
catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
concentrations reach ~500ppm. Beyond that point, nothing humans can do
will stop a runaway warming of the planet. The Greenland ice sheets will
melt, submerging NYC, London, Bangladesh, Florida and many other places
under 7 Metres of sea water. Then the Antarctic ice will melt,
submerging much of the rest under 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of water. The cost
will be enormous. If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then
we may avoid the worst of it.

> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.

**An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
humans do.

OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete moron.
I fully expect that one of two things will occur:

1) You won't read about it.
2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html

And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.

Now THAT is something for you bleat about.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>> Yea man!
>> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>
> **No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with GLOBAL
> climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW: Not very
> much.
>
> and
>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>
> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
> understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.

And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,
just like the stupid professional god botherers.

> (t.t.trembling in the
>> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?

> Wrong question.

We'll see...

> The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce CO2 levels fast
> enough to avoid complete catastrophe?

Nope, there is not a shred of evidence of any complete catastrophe.

It isn't even clear that what temperature change we have seen is actually
a bad thing.

> Complete catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
> concentrations reach ~500ppm.

Only by fools who don't have a shred of evidence to substantiate
that stupid hysterical claim.

> Beyond that point, nothing humans can do will stop a runaway warming of
> the planet.

Easy to claim.

> The Greenland ice sheets will melt, submerging NYC, London, Bangladesh,
> Florida and many other places under 7 Metres of sea water.

Easy to claim.

> Then the Antarctic ice will melt, submerging much of the rest under 70
> (SEVENTY) Metres of water.

Easy to claim.

> The cost will be enormous.

How odd that it wasnt the last time it rose by more than that.

> If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then we may avoid the
> worst of it.

Easy to claim.

Fortunately it won't be long before we exceed 500ppm
and we will see you fools face down in the mud, as always.

>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.

> An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
> humans do.
>
> OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
> afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
> may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete moron.
> I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>
> 1) You won't read about it.
> 2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>
> And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
> around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
> continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.

But that is only 0.5C, nothing to get hysterical about.

> Now THAT is something for you bleat about.

He isnt that stupid, unlike you stupid hysterics.

pi^pi / 3.3... / 3.3... / 3.3... = 0.9844783094

( 9844783094 - 4903874489 ) / 9 = 548989845

548989845 / e (20) = 1.131552408

( 804255131 - 131552408 ) / 9 = 74744747

74744747 / phi (37) = 1.383687402

( 383687402 / 204786383 ) / 99 = 1807081

pi^pi / 3.3... / 3.3... / 3.3... = 0.9844783094

( 9844783094 - 4903874489 ) / 9 = 548989845

548989845 / e (20) = 1.131552408

( 804255131 - 131552408 ) / 9 = 74744747

74744747 / phi (37) = 1.383687402

( 383687402 - 204786383 ) / 99 = 1807081

( 0.9844783094 + 1.131552408 + 1.383687402 ) / pi = 1.113994876

( 6784993 - 3994876 ) / 9 = 310013

On 29/12/2022 8:48 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>> Yea man!
>>>  NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>
>> **No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with
>> GLOBAL climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW:
>> Not very much.
>>
>>   and
>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>
>> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
>> understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.
>
> And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,

**OK, smartarse: Prove that claim. In your proof, you may care to
explain why all the guys at NASA, US Meteorology, US EPA and other
government organisations, did not lose their jobs under the George W
Bush and Donald Trump Presidencies. Both Presidents were rabid global
warming deniers, yet all those organisations were presenting clear and
unequivocal warnings about AGW. Likewise, here in Australia, CSIRO, BoM
and other government funded organisations were issuing the same clear
and unequivocal warnings to John Howard, Scummo and Tony Abbott. Those
PMs were also AGW deniers.

Over to you.

> just like the stupid professional god botherers.
>
>>   (t.t.trembling in the
>>> long grass, actually).  Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>
>> Wrong question.
>
> We'll see...
>
>> The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce CO2 levels fast
>> enough to avoid complete catastrophe?
>
> Nope, there is not a shred of evidence of any complete catastrophe.

**Actually, there is, but scientists are not 100% certain. However, they
are suggesting that runaway warming is likely to occur with a confidence
level of around 90%, if CO2 levels are not kept below 500ppm.

So, yes, it is not guaranteed, just very, VERY likely.

>
> It isn't even clear that what temperature change we have seen is
> actually a bad thing.

**You fucking moron. It is a horrible thing. Not so bad for Greenlanders
and those poor sods living in the Arctic Circle, but horrible for most
of the planet.

>
>> Complete catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>> concentrations reach ~500ppm.
>
> Only by fools who don't have a shred of evidence to substantiate
> that stupid hysterical claim.

**We are already seeing the start of that tipping point:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ticking-timebomb-siberia-thawing-permafrost-releases-more-methane-180978381/

>
>> Beyond that point, nothing humans can do will stop a runaway warming
>> of the planet.
>
> Easy to claim.

**Smarter guys than me and certainly you, tell us that 500ppm is the
APPROXIMATE tipping point:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abn7950

>
>> The Greenland ice sheets will melt, submerging NYC, London,
>> Bangladesh, Florida and many other places under 7 Metres of sea water.
>
> Easy to claim.

**IF the tipping point is reached and runaway warming occurs, then
Greenland WILL melt. In fact, it already is:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/greenland-is-melting-faster-than-any-time-in-past-12-000-years/

>
>> Then the Antarctic ice will melt, submerging much of the rest under 70
>> (SEVENTY) Metres of water.
>
> Easy to claim.

**And yet:

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted

>
>> The cost will be enormous.
>
> How odd that it wasnt the last time it rose by more than that.

**Humans weren't around back then you boob.

>
>> If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then we may avoid the
>> worst of it.
>
> Easy to claim.

**Indeed. Easy to prove too.

>
> Fortunately it won't be long before we exceed 500ppm
> and we will see you fools face down in the mud, as always.

**Why would you ignore all the science? Take you time in responding.

>
>>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.
>
>> An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
>> humans do.
>>
>> OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
>> afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
>> may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete
>> moron. I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>>
>> 1) You won't read about it.
>> 2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>>
>> And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
>> around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
>> continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.
>
> But that is only 0.5C, nothing to get hysterical about.
>
>> Now THAT is something for you bleat about.
>
> He isnt that stupid, unlike you stupid hysterics.

**Like you, Jason is a moron.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_lorikeet

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:55:46 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 29/12/2022 8:48 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>> Yea man!
>>>> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>>
>>> No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with GLOBAL
>>> climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW: Not
>>> very much.
>>>
>>> and
>>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>>
>>> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
>>> understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.

>> And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,

> OK, smartarse: Prove that claim.

Go and fuck yourself, again.

> Over to you.

>> just like the stupid professional god botherers.
>>
>>> (t.t.trembling in the
>>>> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>>
>>> Wrong question.
>> We'll see...
>>
>>> The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce CO2 levels fast
>>> enough to avoid complete catastrophe?

>> Nope, there is not a shred of evidence of any complete catastrophe.

> Actually, there is,

Then present that... Waiting...

> but scientists are not 100% certain. However, they are suggesting that
> runaway warming is likely to occur with a confidence level of around
> 90%, if CO2 levels are not kept below 500ppm.

That's a CLAIM, not EVIDENCE, fuckwit.

> So, yes, it is not guaranteed, just very, VERY likely.

Easy to CLAIM.

>> It isn't even clear that what temperature change we have seen is
>> actually a bad thing.

> You fucking moron.

Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there.

> It is a horrible thing.

Not a shred of evidence of that.

> Not so bad for Greenlanders and those poor sods living in the Arctic
> Circle, but horrible for most of the planet.

Not a schred of evidence that even say 2C which the worst of
the hysterics stupidly claim if we do see 500ppm would produce.

>>> Complete catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>>> concentrations reach ~500ppm.
>> Only by fools who don't have a shred of evidence to substantiate
>> that stupid hysterical claim.

> We are already seeing the start of that tipping point:

BULLSHIT.

> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ticking-timebomb-siberia-thawing-permafrost-releases-more-methane-180978381/

That doesn't say that that would happen at 500ppm, fuckwit.

>>> Beyond that point, nothing humans can do will stop a runaway warming
>>> of the planet.

>> Easy to claim.

> Smarter guys than me and certainly you, tell us that 500ppm is the
> APPROXIMATE tipping point:

Easy to claim.

> https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abn7950

>>> The Greenland ice sheets will melt, submerging NYC, London,
>>> Bangladesh, Florida and many other places under 7 Metres of sea water.

>> Easy to claim.

> IF the tipping point is reached and runaway warming occurs,

Not a shred of evidence that that will happen when we reach 500ppm.

> then Greenland WILL melt. In fact, it already is:
>
> https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/greenland-is-melting-faster-than-any-time-in-past-12-000-years/

And that has not in fact seen any significant sea level rise,
let alone anything even remotely like any tipping point.

>>> Then the Antarctic ice will melt, submerging much of the rest under 70
>>> (SEVENTY) Metres of water.

>> Easy to claim.

> And yet:

> https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted

But not a shred of evidence that all glaciers would melt if
we see 500ppm.

>>> The cost will be enormous.

>> How odd that it wasnt the last time it rose by more than that.

> Humans weren't around back then you boob.

Bullshit they weren't. Try telling that to the abos that
walked in to Oz before it rose. Don't be TOO surprised
when they just laugh in your stupid face like everyone
else does with you stupid hysterics.

>>> If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then we may avoid the
>>> worst of it.

>> Easy to claim.

> Indeed. Easy to prove too.

Pity no one has done that.

>> Fortunately it won't be long before we exceed 500ppm
>> and we will see you fools face down in the mud, as always.

> Why would you ignore all the science?

I don't, you silly little pathological liar.

>>>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>>>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.
>>
>>> An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
>>> humans do.
>>>
>>> OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
>>> afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
>>> may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete
>>> moron. I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>>>
>>> 1) You won't read about it.
>>> 2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>>>
>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>>>
>>> And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
>>> around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
>>> continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.

>> But that is only 0.5C, nothing to get hysterical about.

>>> Now THAT is something for you bleat about.

>> He isnt that stupid, unlike you stupid hysterics.

> Like you, Jason is a moron.

We'll see when we go past 500ppm and nothing that matters happens...

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 14:19:30 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:55:46 +1100, Trevor Wilson
><trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
The two of Earth polar vortexs click in reducing earths temperatures
when needed.
<https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2018/ArtMID/7878/ArticleID/790/Clarity-and-Clouds-Progress-in-Understanding-Arctic-Influences-on-Mid-latitude-Weather>
https://tinyurl.com/2gx7o78o
More persistent weak stratospheric polar vortex states linked to cold
extremes.
--
Petzl
What perfect set of circumstances placed our Sun a
Celestial ball of fire at just the correct distance
from our little blue planet for life to evolve?
All simply conicidence?
The very fact we exist is nothing but the result of a
complex yet inevitable string of chemical accidents
and biological mutations?
There is no Grand meaning? There is no purpose?

If gravity was slightly more powerful
the universe would collapse into a bowl!
If gravity was less powerful the universe would fly apart,
there would be no stars no planets!

Gravity is precisely as strong as it needs to be!
If the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the
strong force wasn't 1% life wouldn't exist!

On 29/12/2022 2:19 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:55:46 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 29/12/2022 8:48 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>>> Yea man!
>>>>>  NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>>>
>>>> No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with
>>>> GLOBAL climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface.
>>>> IOW: Not very much.
>>>>
>>>>   and
>>>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike
>>>> you, understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.
>
>>>  And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,
>
>> OK, smartarse: Prove that claim.
>
> Go and fuck yourself, again.

**Your typical inability to provide even a shred of evidence to support
your insane claims is duly noted.

Wanna give up yet?

Or will you keep digging yourself into an even deeper hole.

>
>> Over to you.
>
>>> just like the stupid professional god botherers.
>>>
>>>>   (t.t.trembling in the
>>>>> long grass, actually).  Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>>>
>>>> Wrong question.
>>>  We'll see...
>>>
>>>> The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce CO2 levels
>>>> fast enough to avoid complete catastrophe?
>
>>>  Nope, there is not a shred of evidence of any complete catastrophe.
>
>> Actually, there is,
>
> Then present that...  Waiting...
>
>> but scientists are not 100% certain. However, they are suggesting that
>> runaway warming is likely to occur with a confidence level of around
>> 90%, if CO2 levels are not kept below 500ppm.
>
> That's a CLAIM, not EVIDENCE, fuckwit.
>
>> So, yes, it is not guaranteed, just very, VERY likely.
>
> Easy to CLAIM.

**The claim has been made

>
>>>  It isn't even clear that what temperature change we have seen is
>>> actually a bad thing.
>
>> You fucking moron.
>
> Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there.

**As usual, I was merely stating fact.

>
>> It is a horrible thing.
>
> Not a shred of evidence of that.

**Wrong:

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/

>
>> Not so bad for Greenlanders and those poor sods living in the Arctic
>> Circle, but horrible for most of the planet.
>
> Not a schred of evidence that even say 2C which the worst of
> the hysterics stupidly claim if we do see 500ppm would produce.

**Wrong:

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/

>
>>>> Complete catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>>>> concentrations reach ~500ppm.
>>>  Only by fools who don't have a shred of evidence to substantiate
>>> that stupid hysterical claim.
>
>> We are already seeing the start of that tipping point:
>
> BULLSHIT.
>
>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ticking-timebomb-siberia-thawing-permafrost-releases-more-methane-180978381/
>
> That doesn't say that that would happen at 500ppm, fuckwit.

**It is happening NOW. The amount of methane being released from Arctic
regions is increasing rapidly. Methane is more than 20 times more potent
a GHG as CO2 is. Methane releases will accelerate warming more rapidly.

>
>>>> Beyond that point, nothing humans can do will stop a runaway warming
>>>> of the planet.
>
>>>  Easy to claim.
>
>> Smarter guys than me and certainly you, tell us that 500ppm is the
>> APPROXIMATE tipping point:
>
> Easy to claim.

**OK, here's the thing Roddles. If I want to know how to mop a floor,
I'll ask you. If I want to know about climate science and it's impacts,
I'll ask the guys who live, eat, sleep and breathe the subject. That
ain't you.

>
>> https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abn7950
>
>>>> The Greenland ice sheets will melt, submerging NYC, London,
>>>> Bangladesh, Florida and many other places under 7 Metres of sea water.
>
>>>  Easy to claim.
>
>> IF the tipping point is reached and runaway warming occurs,
>
> Not a shred of evidence that that will happen when we reach 500ppm.

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system

>
>> then Greenland WILL melt. In fact, it already is:
>>
>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/greenland-is-melting-faster-than-any-time-in-past-12-000-years/
>
> And that has not in fact seen any significant sea level rise,
> let alone anything even remotely like any tipping point.

**Bullshit (do you actually research anything, before you commit your
insanity to the internet?):

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level

"The global mean water level in the ocean rose by 0.14 inches (3.6
millimeters) per year from 2006–2015, which was 2.5 times the average
rate of 0.06 inches (1.4 millimeters) per year throughout most of the
twentieth century. By the end of the century, global mean sea level is
likely to rise at least one foot (0.3 meters) above 2000 levels, even if
greenhouse gas emissions follow a relatively low pathway in coming decades."

IOW: Sea level rise is accelerating.

>
>>>> Then the Antarctic ice will melt, submerging much of the rest under
>>>> 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of water.
>
>>>  Easy to claim.
>
>> And yet:
>
>> https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted
>
> But not a shred of evidence that all glaciers would melt if
> we see 500ppm.

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system

>
>>>> The cost will be enormous.
>
>>>  How odd that it wasnt the last time it rose by more than that.
>
>> Humans weren't around back then you boob.
>
> Bullshit they weren't.

**You can call bullshut all you want, you'll still be wrong.

Try telling that to the abos that
> walked in to Oz before it rose.

**Did they? How do you know? Were you there? How do you know that they
did not arrive by boat?

Don't be TOO surprised
> when they just laugh in your stupid face like everyone
> else does with you stupid hysterics.
>
>>>> If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then we may avoid
>>>> the worst of it.
>
>>>  Easy to claim.
>
>> Indeed. Easy to prove too.
>
> Pity no one has done that.
>
>>>  Fortunately it won't be long before we exceed 500ppm
>>> and we will see you fools face down in the mud, as always.
>
>> Why would you ignore all the science?
>
> I don't, you silly little pathological liar.

**Yeah, OK, the science mopping floors is something you understand well.
Real science is beyond your grasp.

>
>>>>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>>>>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.
>>>
>>>> An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2
>>>> that humans do.
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
>>>> afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical
>>>> process may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a
>>>> complete moron. I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>>>>
>>>> 1) You won't read about it.
>>>> 2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>>>>
>>>> And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
>>>> around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
>>>> continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.
>
>>>  But that is only 0.5C, nothing to get hysterical about.
>
>>>> Now THAT is something for you bleat about.
>
>>>  He isnt that stupid, unlike you stupid hysterics.
>
>> Like you, Jason is a moron.
>
> We'll see when we go past 500ppm and nothing that matters happens...

On 29/12/2022 11:55 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 29/12/2022 8:48 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>> Yea man!
>>>>  NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>>
>>> **No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with
>>> GLOBAL climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW:
>>> Not very much.
>>>
>>>   and
>>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>>
>>> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike
>>> you, understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.
>>
>> And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,
>
> **OK, smartarse: Prove that claim. In your proof, you may care to
> explain why all the guys at NASA, US Meteorology, US EPA and other
> government organisations, did not lose their jobs under the George W
> Bush and Donald Trump Presidencies. Both Presidents were rabid global
> warming deniers, yet all those organisations were presenting clear and
> unequivocal warnings about AGW. Likewise, here in Australia, CSIRO, BoM
> and other government funded organisations were issuing the same clear
> and unequivocal warnings to John Howard, Scummo and Tony Abbott. Those
> PMs were also AGW deniers.
>
> Over to you.

:-)) Bet those points will bring on a deafening silence or a
'whataboutist' spasm.

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 16:32:07 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 29/12/2022 2:19 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:55:46 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29/12/2022 8:48 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>>>> Yea man!
>>>>>> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with
>>>>> GLOBAL climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface.
>>>>> IOW: Not very much.
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike
>>>>> you, understand and study the climate every working day of their
>>>>> lives.
>>
>>>> And who would lose their jobs if they didn't preach the gospel,
>>
>>> OK, smartarse: Prove that claim.

>> Go and fuck yourself, again.

> Your typical inability to provide

Just another of your bare faced lies.

<reams of your shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it
belongs>

>>>> just like the stupid professional god botherers.
>>>>
>>>>> (t.t.trembling in the
>>>>>> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>>>>
>>>>> Wrong question.
>>>> We'll see...
>>>>
>>>>> The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce CO2 levels
>>>>> fast enough to avoid complete catastrophe?
>>
>>>> Nope, there is not a shred of evidence of any complete catastrophe..
>>
>>> Actually, there is,
>> Then present that... Waiting...
>>
>>> but scientists are not 100% certain. However, they are suggesting that
>>> runaway warming is likely to occur with a confidence level of around
>>> 90%, if CO2 levels are not kept below 500ppm.
>> That's a CLAIM, not EVIDENCE, fuckwit.
>>
>>> So, yes, it is not guaranteed, just very, VERY likely.
>> Easy to CLAIM.

> The claim has been made

But has no evidence to support it and will soon
be proved to be just another stupid claim.

>>>> It isn't even clear that what temperature change we have seen is
>>>> actually a bad thing.
>>
>>> You fucking moron.
>> Wota stunning line in rational argument you have there.

<reams of your shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it
belongs>

>>> It is a horrible thing.

>> Not a shred of evidence of that.

> Wrong:

> https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/

That doesn't provide a shred of evidence
of any horrible thing if we do see 500ppm.

>>> Not so bad for Greenlanders and those poor sods living in the Arctic
>>> Circle, but horrible for most of the planet.

>> Not a schred of evidence that even say 2C which the worst of
>> the hysterics stupidly claim if we do see 500ppm would produce.

> Wrong:

> https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/

That doesn't provide a shred of evidence
of any horrible thing for most of the planet
if we do see 500ppm.

>>>>> Complete catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>>>>> concentrations reach ~500ppm.
>>>> Only by fools who don't have a shred of evidence to substantiate
>>>> that stupid hysterical claim.
>>
>>> We are already seeing the start of that tipping point:
>> BULLSHIT.
>>
>>> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ticking-timebomb-siberia-thawing-permafrost-releases-more-methane-180978381/
>> That doesn't say that that would happen at 500ppm, fuckwit.

> It is happening NOW.

But has only produced an increase of 0.5C, hardly the end
of civilisation as we know it or anything even remotely like
any horrible thing for most of the planet

> The amount of methane being released from Arctic regions is increasing
> rapidly. Methane is more than 20 times more potent a GHG as CO2 is.
> Methane releases will accelerate warming more rapidly.

But has only produced an increase of 0.5C, hardly the end
of civilisation as we know it or anything even remotely like
any horrible thing for most of the planet

>>>>> Beyond that point, nothing humans can do will stop a runaway warming
>>>>> of the planet.
>>
>>>> Easy to claim.
>>
>>> Smarter guys than me and certainly you, tell us that 500ppm is the
>>> APPROXIMATE tipping point:

>> Easy to claim.

<reams of your shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it
belongs>>

>>> https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abn7950
>>
>>>>> The Greenland ice sheets will melt, submerging NYC, London,
>>>>> Bangladesh, Florida and many other places under 7 Metres of sea
>>>>> water.
>>
>>>> Easy to claim.
>>
>>> IF the tipping point is reached and runaway warming occurs,
>> Not a shred of evidence that that will happen when we reach 500ppm.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system

That isn't EVIDENCE of what will happen if we get to 500ppm.

>>> then Greenland WILL melt. In fact, it already is:
>>>
>>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/greenland-is-melting-faster-than-any-time-in-past-12-000-years/

>> And that has not in fact seen any significant sea level rise,
>> let alone anything even remotely like any tipping point.

> Bullshit (do you actually research anything,

Yep.

<reams of your shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it
belongs>

> https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level

> The global mean water level in the ocean rose by 0.14 inches (3.6
> millimeters) per year from 2006–2015,

Which is just 1.5 inches, hardly the end of civilisation as we know it, let
alone anything even remotely like any horrible thing for most of the planet

> which was 2.5 times the average rate of 0.06 inches (1.4 millimeters)
> per year throughout most of the twentieth century.

Which is hardly the end of civilisation as we know it, let alone
anything even remotely like any horrible thing for most of the planet

> By the end of the century,

WAY past when we will have seen 500ppm

> global mean sea level is likely to rise at least one foot (0.3 meters)
> above 2000 levels, even if greenhouse gas emissions follow a relatively
> low pathway in coming decades."

> IOW: Sea level rise is accelerating.

Only in that particular 10 years and it remains
to be seen if that will keep accelerating.

>>>>> Then the Antarctic ice will melt, submerging much of the rest under
>>>>> 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of water.
>>
>>>> Easy to claim.
>>
>>> And yet:
>>
>>> https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted
>> But not a shred of evidence that all glaciers would melt if
>> we see 500ppm.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system

Not a shred of evidence that all glaciers would melt if we see 500ppm.

>>>>> The cost will be enormous.
>>
>>>> How odd that it wasnt the last time it rose by more than that.
>>
>>> Humans weren't around back then you boob.

>> Bullshit they weren't.

> You can call bullshut all you want, you'll still be wrong.

We'll see...

>> Try telling that to the abos that
>> walked in to Oz before it rose.

> Did they? How do you know?

None of them ever had the boats that could get them
from SE asia to here or even from Melburg to Tassie either.

> Were you there?

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.

> How do you know that they did not arrive by boat?

See above.

>> Don't be TOO surprised
>> when they just laugh in your stupid face like everyone
>> else does with you stupid hysterics.
>>
>>>>> If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then we may avoid
>>>>> the worst of it.
>>
>>>> Easy to claim.
>>
>>> Indeed. Easy to prove too.
>> Pity no one has done that.
>>
>>>> Fortunately it won't be long before we exceed 500ppm
>>>> and we will see you fools face down in the mud, as always.
>>
>>> Why would you ignore all the science?
>> I don't, you silly little pathological liar.

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:04:31 +1100, Fran
<gettingmoredelusionalbythedayistheforger@nutcasewannabeFran.com>
wrote:

>> Over to you.
>
>:-)) Bet those points will bring on a deafening silence or a
>'whataboutist' spasm.
>
Sounds like you need a drink of the wine Jesus drank!
2 tbsp Red Wine Vinegar
250ml Water (glass of water)
Mix and drink!
--
Petzl
Jesus “taught with authority” (Matthew 7:29), and the risen Lord gave
his Apostles a share in his authority when he commissioned them to
make disciples from all the nations by teaching what he had commanded
them (Matthew 28:18–20).

Tiberius Caesar who reigned for 22 years,
and his last year was AD 37. wrote:
"The extremities of Spain, the various parts of Gaul, the regions of
Britain which have never been penetrated by Roman arms, have received
the religion of Christ."

Guess what? Tsar Vladimir is about to be pushed off the front pages.
The Israeli elections have elevated that bull-necked Zionist Net&Yahoo
to the prime minister ship of that land, yet again, with the help of
all those right-wing furry fanatics. The whole West Bank is in their
sights and even as I toss-off this prose the usual Wall St & Hollywood
Zionists are drawing up their plans! An invasion it will be, with
fervent prayers to Moses-the-Warlord who started it all way back when.
But will the western press show Arab weeping women & cute kids? Guess
again! Shame!

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

>On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>> Yea man!
>>
>> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>
>**No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with GLOBAL
>climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW: Not very
>much.
>
> and
>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>
>**Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
>understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.
>
> (t.t.trembling in the
>> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>
>**Wrong question. The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce
>CO2 levels fast enough to avoid complete catastrophe? Complete
>catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>concentrations reach ~500ppm. Beyond that point, nothing humans can do
>will stop a runaway warming of the planet. The Greenland ice sheets will
>melt, submerging NYC, London, Bangladesh, Florida and many other places
>under 7 Metres of sea water. Then the Antarctic ice will melt,
>submerging much of the rest under 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of water. The cost
>will be enormous. If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then
>we may avoid the worst of it.

Did you know the world's oceans cover about 3/4 the Earth's surface?
And that CO2 is soluble in water?
Have you heard of buffers?
And if we have that melting scenario there will be even more water for
the CO2 to bustle in?

Silly boy. For all the rantings of philosophers, theologians, uni
graduates it is the engineers (hooray!) who will save the day. Given
the vast progress of the last 100 years who knows what will arrive in
the next 100! Long before the oceans turn to soda water!
Advances in nuclear tech and battery tech will change things.

Better worry about economics, after JM Keynes murdered thrift.

>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.
>
>**An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
>humans do.
>
>OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
>afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
>may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete moron.
>I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>
>1) You won't read about it.
>2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>
>https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>
>And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
>around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
>continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.
>
>Now THAT is something for you bleat about.

On 30/12/2022 8:16 am, Peter Jason wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022 05:43:33 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 28/12/2022 8:05 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>> Yea man!
>>>
>>> NYC is frozen solid; the whole USA has entered the new ice age,
>>
>> **No, it has not. You're confusing local weather conditions, with GLOBAL
>> climate. The USA covers around 7% of the Earth's surface. IOW: Not very
>> much.
>>
>> and
>>> the Global-Warming Cultists have run to ground
>>
>> **Do you mean: Climate scientists? You know, those guys who, unlike you,
>> understand and study the climate every working day of their lives.
>>
>> (t.t.trembling in the
>>> long grass, actually). Will there be enough CO2 to save the planet?
>>
>> **Wrong question. The question should be: Will humans be able to reduce
>> CO2 levels fast enough to avoid complete catastrophe? Complete
>> catastrophe is generally considered to be a point when CO2
>> concentrations reach ~500ppm. Beyond that point, nothing humans can do
>> will stop a runaway warming of the planet. The Greenland ice sheets will
>> melt, submerging NYC, London, Bangladesh, Florida and many other places
>> under 7 Metres of sea water. Then the Antarctic ice will melt,
>> submerging much of the rest under 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of water. The cost
>> will be enormous. If we can keep CO2 concentrations under 500ppm, then
>> we may avoid the worst of it.
>
> Did you know the world's oceans cover about 3/4 the Earth's surface?

**71% actually. What's your point?

> And that CO2 is soluble in water?

**Of course. What's your point?

> Have you heard of buffers?

**Of course. What's your point?

> And if we have that melting scenario there will be even more water for
> the CO2 to bustle in?

**Yes. What's your point? That we have more water to dissolve CO2 in,
so, even though London, NYC, Florida and Bangladesh will be under water,
that it's all OK? Is that what you're trying to tell me?

>
> Silly boy.

**Unlike you, I actually read and understand the science. You are an
ignoramus. You have failed to read the premier documents on the matter.

For all the rantings of philosophers, theologians, uni
> graduates it is the engineers (hooray!) who will save the day.

**Maybe. They need to act fast though.

Given
> the vast progress of the last 100 years who knows what will arrive in
> the next 100!

**Sure. We may develop some revolutionary technology to solve all our
problems.

Or not.

Long before the oceans turn to soda water!
> Advances in nuclear tech and battery tech will change things.

**Will they? Can you provide an iron-clad guarantee of that? When I was
11 years old, my favourite auntie gave me a science book for Christmas
1964. I read it from cover to cover. Many times. One article, in
particular, fired my imagination. Nuclear fusion. The article was quoted
as saying that practical nuclear fusion reactors were only 20 years
away. They're STILL 20 years away.

Maybe.

>
> Better worry about economics, after JM Keynes murdered thrift.

**Economics is of no practical use, when you're trying to breathe under
water.

>
>
>>> But assuage all fears, for some volcano will chuff out some CO2, and
>>> many will release that confined gas in beer cans.
>>
>> **An ALL the planet's volcanoes emit around 1% of the amount of CO2 that
>> humans do.
>>
>> OTOH, you could try to do some reading on the weather conditions
>> afflicting the US right now. An understanding of the physical process
>> may assist you. Or, more likely, not, because you are a complete moron.
>> I fully expect that one of two things will occur:
>>
>> 1) You won't read about it.
>> 2) You will read it, but won't understand anyway.
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/climate/polar-vortex-winter-cold-weather.html
>>
>> And, despite the very cold condition across the US (which represents
>> around 7% of the Earth's surface area, BTW), the planet, as a whole,
>> continues to warm at the most rapid rate in the past million years.
>>
>> Now THAT is something for you bleat about.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com