On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>>>>>>>> more details
>>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> John B.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>>>>>>
>>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
>>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
>>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
>>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
>>> which means it's a lie.
>>> --
>>> Andrew Muzi
>>> a...@yellowjersey.org
>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>
>> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
>
> But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> it?

"Magic!"

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> >>>>>>>> more details
> >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> John B.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> >>>>>>
> >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> >>> which means it's a lie.
> >>> --
> >>> Andrew Muzi
> >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
> >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >>
> >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
> >
> > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> > it?
> "Magic!"
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
>
At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators. Congratulations.
>
Andre Jute
Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell..
>

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:54:43 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> <snip>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM..
> > >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > >>>>>>>> more details
> > >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> John B.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> > >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> > >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> > >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> > >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> > >>> which means it's a lie.
> > >>> --
> > >>> Andrew Muzi
> > >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
> > >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >>
> > >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
> > >
> > > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> > > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> > > it?
> > "Magic!"
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> >
> At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators. Congratulations.
> >
> Andre Jute
> Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell.

> >

Well at least Krygowski is on the correct track. Dumb-ass Slocomb actually believes that the glaciers are shrinking. I guess he is unaware that it is summertime and the few glaciers know enough to get some sun can be expected to shrink in the Summer and grow in the Winter. But being stupid that would never occur to him. As for the rest of the glaciers above the the arctic circle and below the Antarctic circle NEVER see any sunlight summer or winter and the average temperatures there are -40 degrees. Does warm water occasionally get flushed though the Arctic and Antarctic Oceans? Certainly, in 1868 a Portuguese trader sailed across the entirely open Arctic Ocean from Japan. In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.

The trouble with absolute morons like Slocomb is that he hasn't the slightest desire to know the truth about anything - he and Frank simply want to find some negative lies to use as weapons against the others on this group - this is because they don't belong here and never did so they want to get even with us for actually riding bikes and being capable of building them up. Slocomb was always a useless POS, and Krygowski was a close second.

On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.

Nope. The Nautilus went under the ice and near the North Pole in Aug
1958 but did not surface through the ice.

In 1959, the Skate was the first to surface at the North Pole.
<https://www.amphilsoc.org/exhibits/nautilus/pole.htm>
Santa Claus was busy and not available to greet them at the pole.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Skate_(SSN-578)>
"While the Skate was unable to surface on its first voyage to the
pole, on 17 March 1959, she became the first submarine to surface at
the North Pole."

No vessel has yet been able to approach the North Pole on the surface.
They went under the ice and surfaced through the ice.

At the pole, the ice is 2 to 3 meters thick:
<https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/north-pole/>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:54:43?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55?AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> > > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> > >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> > >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> > >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>> > >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> <snip>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>> > >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>> > >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>> > >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>> > >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>> > >>>>>>>> more details
>> > >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> --
>> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> John B.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>> > >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
>> > >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
>> > >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
>> > >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
>> > >>> which means it's a lie.
>> > >>> --
>> > >>> Andrew Muzi
>> > >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
>> > >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> > >>
>> > >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
>> > >
>> > > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
>> > > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
>> > > it?
>> > "Magic!"
>> >
>> > --
>> > - Frank Krygowski
>> >
>> At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators. Congratulations.
>> >
>> Andre Jute
>> Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell.
>
>> >
>
>Well at least Krygowski is on the correct track. Dumb-ass Slocomb actually believes that the glaciers are shrinking. I guess he is unaware that it is summertime and the few glaciers know enough to get some sun can be expected to shrink in the Summer and grow in the Winter. But being stupid that would never occur to him. As for the rest of the glaciers above the the arctic circle and below the Antarctic circle NEVER see any sunlight summer or winter and the average temperatures there are -40 degrees. Does warm water occasionally get flushed though the Arctic and Antarctic Oceans? Certainly, in 1868 a Portuguese trader sailed across the entirely open Arctic Ocean from Japan. In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.

Re glacier: See
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/big-thaw
which says in part, "When President Taft created Glacier National Park
in 1910, it was home to an estimated 150 glaciers. Since then the
number has decreased to fewer than 30, and most of those remaining
have shrunk in area by two-thirds. Fagre predicts that within 30 years
most if not all of the park's namesake glaciers will disappear."

And as for open water at north pole. Yes there is, at times, open
water in the Aortic Ocean. Called "leads". You can read all about them
at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_(sea_ice)

Care to provide us with more examples of your ignorance?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 2:06:47 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:54:43?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55?AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> > On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >> > > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >> > >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >> > >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >> > >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> >> > >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>>> <snip>
> >> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> >> > >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> >> > >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> >> > >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> >> > >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> >> > >>>>>>>> more details
> >> > >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>> --
> >> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>>> John B.
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> >> > >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> >> > >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> >> > >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> >> > >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> >> > >>> which means it's a lie.
> >> > >>> --
> >> > >>> Andrew Muzi
> >> > >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
> >> > >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >> > >>
> >> > >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
> >> > >
> >> > > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> >> > > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> >> > > it?
> >> > "Magic!"
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > - Frank Krygowski
> >> >
> >> At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators.. Congratulations.
> >> >
> >> Andre Jute
> >> Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell.
> >
> >> >
> >
> >Well at least Krygowski is on the correct track. Dumb-ass Slocomb actually believes that the glaciers are shrinking. I guess he is unaware that it is summertime and the few glaciers know enough to get some sun can be expected to shrink in the Summer and grow in the Winter. But being stupid that would never occur to him. As for the rest of the glaciers above the the arctic circle and below the Antarctic circle NEVER see any sunlight summer or winter and the average temperatures there are -40 degrees. Does warm water occasionally get flushed though the Arctic and Antarctic Oceans? Certainly, in 1868 a Portuguese trader sailed across the entirely open Arctic Ocean from Japan. In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.
> Re glacier: See
> https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/big-thaw
> which says in part, "When President Taft created Glacier National Park
> in 1910, it was home to an estimated 150 glaciers. Since then the
> number has decreased to fewer than 30, and most of those remaining
> have shrunk in area by two-thirds. Fagre predicts that within 30 years
> most if not all of the park's namesake glaciers will disappear."
>
> And as for open water at north pole. Yes there is, at times, open
> water in the Aortic Ocean. Called "leads". You can read all about them
> at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_(sea_ice)
>
> Care to provide us with more examples of your ignorance?
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.
>
Are you malicious or merely a stupid peasant, Slow Johnn?. There are, and have always been, glaciers disappearing while other shot up elsewhere. That is the nature of glaciers, you moron.
>
Mr Kunich says sometimes a submarine can surface at the North Pole, and you find a link that says there is sometimes open water at the North Pole, and then call him a liar in your very next sentence. You're totally lacking in sophistication, aren't you? Stupid is as stupid does.
>
Andre Jute
I bet Slow Johnny Slowcomb tortured cats and other small animals as a child.. He lacks the moral foundation to grasp it is wrong.
>

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 7:39:15 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 2:06:47 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:54:43?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55?AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> > On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> > >> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > >> > > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> > >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >> > >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> > >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > >> > >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> <snip>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > >> > >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > >> > >>>>>>>> more details
> > >> > >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> John B.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> > >> > >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> > >> > >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> > >> > >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> > >> > >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> > >> > >>> which means it's a lie.
> > >> > >>> --
> > >> > >>> Andrew Muzi
> > >> > >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
> > >> > >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> > >> > > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> > >> > > it?
> > >> > "Magic!"
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > - Frank Krygowski
> > >> >
> > >> At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators. Congratulations.
> > >> >
> > >> Andre Jute
> > >> Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell.
> > >
> > >> >
> > >
> > >Well at least Krygowski is on the correct track. Dumb-ass Slocomb actually believes that the glaciers are shrinking. I guess he is unaware that it is summertime and the few glaciers know enough to get some sun can be expected to shrink in the Summer and grow in the Winter. But being stupid that would never occur to him. As for the rest of the glaciers above the the arctic circle and below the Antarctic circle NEVER see any sunlight summer or winter and the average temperatures there are -40 degrees. Does warm water occasionally get flushed though the Arctic and Antarctic Oceans? Certainly, in 1868 a Portuguese trader sailed across the entirely open Arctic Ocean from Japan. In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.
> > Re glacier: See
> > https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/big-thaw
> > which says in part, "When President Taft created Glacier National Park
> > in 1910, it was home to an estimated 150 glaciers. Since then the
> > number has decreased to fewer than 30, and most of those remaining
> > have shrunk in area by two-thirds. Fagre predicts that within 30 years
> > most if not all of the park's namesake glaciers will disappear."
> >
> > And as for open water at north pole. Yes there is, at times, open
> > water in the Aortic Ocean. Called "leads". You can read all about them
> > at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_(sea_ice)
> >
> > Care to provide us with more examples of your ignorance?
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John B.
> >
> Are you malicious or merely a stupid peasant, Slow Johnn?. There are, and have always been, glaciers disappearing while other shot up elsewhere. That is the nature of glaciers, you moron.
> >
> Mr Kunich says sometimes a submarine can surface at the North Pole, and you find a link that says there is sometimes open water at the North Pole, and then call him a liar in your very next sentence. You're totally lacking in sophistication, aren't you? Stupid is as stupid does.
> >
> Andre Jute
> I bet Slow Johnny Slowcomb tortured cats and other small animals as a child. He lacks the moral foundation to grasp it is wrong.
> >
The pure ignorance of Slocomb is outing all of the time. Between him and Liebermann they absolutely have to be experts at everything and when they aren't they simply lie about it.

On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/706.png
>This is the USS Skate and the USS Sharkfin at the north pole.

Yep. That was in Aug 1962, not "the 1950's" as you claimed:
"In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole
in entirely open water of three occasions."

It was the Skate and the Seadragon, not Sharkfin.
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skate_and_Seadragon_at_NP_August_1962.jpg>
"The USS Skate (SSN-578), background, and her sister submarine, USS
Seadragon (SSN-584), rendezvous at the North Pole in August 1962 (US
Navy photo)."

It doesn't look like "entirely open water" as there are still a few
floating ice cubes visible.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

> The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
> >

The important thing here is 420.

> Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.

MRI is a real form of spectroscopy

My problem??? With your article?? I liked it, myself.

The idea of man-made global warming is pure hubris. A flea, doing the backstroke down the river, crying "rIse the drawbridge"

Uh.. pisswilly?

Doug Landau <doug.landau@gmail.com> writes:

>> Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance
> spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real
> Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.
>
> MRI is a real form of spectroscopy

True. What is "real spectroscopy"? Mass spectroscopy? Raman
spectroscopy? Electron energy loss spectroscopy?

--

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 4:08:57 PM UTC-7, Doug Landau wrote:
> > Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.
> MRI is a real form of spectroscopy
Technically spectroscopy is in the light spectrum. MRI is far above that and rather than isolating frequencies of light looks at chemical reactions to X-ray frequencies. Same thing but used in a different manner. Chromatography looks at the frequencies of light that are absorbed by various gases or liquids.

But MRI really looks more at density than chemical reactions. It is those reactions that appear on your scan as changes in density.

In relation to Sunlight, the frequency at which CO2 absorbs is almost at ground temperature. In terms of Kelvin there is a lot of energy there but in terms of the Centigrade there is hardly a measurable difference. Hence, energy at ground level doesn't radiate - it is carried to the upper stratosphere via conduction. All atmospheric gases conduct energy at almost identical rates.

You have to be extremely careful of that bullshit NASA and NOAA charts. While they are showing a large amount of radiation, that is almost entirely from the reflected radiation from the clouds. The real "greenhouse gas" is the water content of the atmosphere which is pretty high on average.

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 4:45:28 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Doug Landau <doug....@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance
> > spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real
> > Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.
> >
> > MRI is a real form of spectroscopy
> True. What is "real spectroscopy"? Mass spectroscopy? Raman
> spectroscopy? Electron energy loss spectroscopy?
>
> --
Essentially it is all spectroscopy but used in different manners. Chromatography is the visible spectrum of light. CO2 doesn't absorb visible light and virtually ALL of the energy in Sunlight is in the Ultra-Violet and visible light spectrum.

On 10/26/2023 6:07 PM, Doug Landau wrote:
>
>> The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
>>>
>
> The important thing here is 420.

Hitler's birthday? What?
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 7:39:15 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 2:06:47 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:43:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:54:43?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:55?AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> > On 10/24/2023 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> > >> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > >> > > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> > >>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >> > >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> > >>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > >> > >>>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> <snip>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > >> > >>>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > >> > >>>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > >> > >>>>>>>> more details
> > >> > >>>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> John B.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> > >> > >>>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> > >> > >>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> > >> > >>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> > >> > >>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> > >> > >>> which means it's a lie.
> > >> > >>> --
> > >> > >>> Andrew Muzi
> > >> > >>> a...@yellowjersey.org
> > >> > >>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
> > >> > > rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
> > >> > > it?
> > >> > "Magic!"
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > - Frank Krygowski
> > >> >
> > >> At last you get something right, Franki-boy. When Scientology has more Science in it than Global Warming, there are only two alternative explanations left for the global warmies. Most chose lies, you choose magic. For once you're making more sense than the rest of the lowest common denominators. Congratulations.
> > >> >
> > >> Andre Jute
> > >> Even a blind squirrel will occasionally find a rotten nut by sense of smell.
> > >
> > >> >
> > >
> > >Well at least Krygowski is on the correct track. Dumb-ass Slocomb actually believes that the glaciers are shrinking. I guess he is unaware that it is summertime and the few glaciers know enough to get some sun can be expected to shrink in the Summer and grow in the Winter. But being stupid that would never occur to him. As for the rest of the glaciers above the the arctic circle and below the Antarctic circle NEVER see any sunlight summer or winter and the average temperatures there are -40 degrees. Does warm water occasionally get flushed though the Arctic and Antarctic Oceans? Certainly, in 1868 a Portuguese trader sailed across the entirely open Arctic Ocean from Japan. In the 1950's American nuclear submarines surfaced at the North Pole in entirely open water of three occasions.
> > Re glacier: See
> > https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/big-thaw
> > which says in part, "When President Taft created Glacier National Park
> > in 1910, it was home to an estimated 150 glaciers. Since then the
> > number has decreased to fewer than 30, and most of those remaining
> > have shrunk in area by two-thirds. Fagre predicts that within 30 years
> > most if not all of the park's namesake glaciers will disappear."
> >
> > And as for open water at north pole. Yes there is, at times, open
> > water in the Aortic Ocean. Called "leads". You can read all about them
> > at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_(sea_ice)
> >
> > Care to provide us with more examples of your ignorance?
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John B.
> >
> Are you malicious or merely a stupid peasant, Slow Johnn?. There are, and have always been, glaciers disappearing while other shot up elsewhere. That is the nature of glaciers, you moron.
> >
> Mr Kunich says sometimes a submarine can surface at the North Pole, and you find a link that says there is sometimes open water at the North Pole, and then call him a liar in your very next sentence. You're totally lacking in sophistication, aren't you? Stupid is as stupid does.
> >
> Andre Jute
> I bet Slow Johnny Slowcomb tortured cats and other small animals as a child. He lacks the moral foundation to grasp it is wrong.
> >
By the way, the internet is filled with misinformation that the stupid 5 are more than willing to lap up. On the way across that Arctic Ocean the USS Skate surfaced a number of times to test the ice thickness and gauge whether surfacing at the North Pole would be practical. That is where most of those pictures of submarines surrounded by ice come from. The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 5:17:14 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/26/2023 6:07 PM, Doug Landau wrote:
> >
> >> The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
> >>>
> >
> > The important thing here is 420.
> Hitler's birthday? What?

Hey. Do you know what's at the bottom of the English Channel, and underneath Greenland ice?
Stone walls. Built by stoned stoneworkers.

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 5:17:14 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/26/2023 6:07 PM, Doug Landau wrote:
> >
> >> The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
> >>>
> >
> > The important thing here is 420.
> Hitler's birthday? What?

well if there is anything of import here it is certainly not the -other- things Andre says

On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On the way across that Arctic Ocean the USS Skate surfaced a number of times to test the ice thickness and gauge whether surfacing at the North Pole would be practical. That is where most of those pictures of submarines surrounded by ice come from. The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/

Nice photo. Perhaps some background might be worthwhile. It seems
that the North Pole was mostly ice free during some years and ice
bound during other years:
"Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 - not so thick"
<https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/>
The web site belongs to Anthony Watts, who's beliefs on climate change
are similar to yours:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts_(blogger)>
One might suspect that his opinions are swayed by his sponsor, the
Heartland Institute.

Pick a Fact Check site:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=fact+check+anthony+watts>

Depending on the source, the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050. Pick your favorite source and
article:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline>
<https://www.google.com/search?q=north+pole+ice+free>

Incidentally, the North Pole did not surface. It was the various
submarines that were photographed after surfacing.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:06:26 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>Chromatography is the visible spectrum of light.

Wrong.

"What is Chromatography and How Does it Work?"
<https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/ask-a-scientist/what-is-chromatography/>
"Chromatography is a process for separating components of a mixture."
"Chromatography gets its name from a technique first used in the late
19th century to separate pigments in a complex mixture."
"Chromatography was initially used by artists, color theorists and
artisans hoping to perfect industrial dyes for textiles."

It's also not just the visible colors but can also be used in the UV
region:
<https://www.iconsci.com/what-is-a-uv-detector/>
"UV detectors are nondestructive chromatography detectors that measure
the amount of ultraviolet or visible light that is absorbed by
components of a mixture being eluted off the chromatography column."

Also in the IR region:
<https://www.chromatographytoday.com/news/gc-mdgc/32/breaking-news/how-is-gc-ir-used/57181>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 10/26/2023 8:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On the way across that Arctic Ocean the USS Skate surfaced a number of times to test the ice thickness and gauge whether surfacing at the North Pole would be practical. That is where most of those pictures of submarines surrounded by ice come from. The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/
>
> Nice photo. Perhaps some background might be worthwhile. It seems
> that the North Pole was mostly ice free during some years and ice
> bound during other years:
> "Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 - not so thick"
> <https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/>
> The web site belongs to Anthony Watts, who's beliefs on climate change
> are similar to yours:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts_(blogger)>
> One might suspect that his opinions are swayed by his sponsor, the
> Heartland Institute.
>
> Pick a Fact Check site:
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=fact+check+anthony+watts>
>
> Depending on the source, the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
> summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050. Pick your favorite source and
> article:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline>
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=north+pole+ice+free>
>
> Incidentally, the North Pole did not surface. It was the various
> submarines that were photographed after surfacing.
>
"the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050."

And I'm told first snow here will be Tuesday. Or not.

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 6:22:36 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/26/2023 8:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On the way across that Arctic Ocean the USS Skate surfaced a number of times to test the ice thickness and gauge whether surfacing at the North Pole would be practical. That is where most of those pictures of submarines surrounded by ice come from. The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/
> >
> > Nice photo. Perhaps some background might be worthwhile. It seems
> > that the North Pole was mostly ice free during some years and ice
> > bound during other years:
> > "Ice at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959 - not so thick"
> > <https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/>
> > The web site belongs to Anthony Watts, who's beliefs on climate change
> > are similar to yours:
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts_(blogger)>
> > One might suspect that his opinions are swayed by his sponsor, the
> > Heartland Institute.
> >
> > Pick a Fact Check site:
> > <https://www.google.com/search?q=fact+check+anthony+watts>
> >
> > Depending on the source, the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
> > summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050. Pick your favorite source and
> > article:
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline>
> > <https://www.google.com/search?q=north+pole+ice+free>
> >
> > Incidentally, the North Pole did not surface. It was the various
> > submarines that were photographed after surfacing.
> >
> "the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
> summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050."
> And I'm told first snow here will be Tuesday. Or not.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> a...@yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

It appears that like I said elsewhere that Liebermann has an emotional need to lie about anything that he had lied about in the past. The fact that there has been thin ice and in the case of the Portuguese trader one year there was almost NO ice a hundred years before the supposed global warming caused by increasing CO2 demonstrates clearly that there isn't anything that Liebermann won't force himself onto us as an expert.

With photographic proof he still denies that in fact he knows nothing at all about the climate or in fact almost everything he has spoken about.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with not knowing about subjects. So why does Liebermann carry on? What is his need to be looked on as an expert when he lived his entire life as not-an-expert?

On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:22:32 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 10/26/2023 8:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>>The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/
>> Incidentally, the North Pole did not surface. It was the various
>> submarines that were photographed after surfacing.

>"the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
> summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050."
>
>And I'm told first snow here will be Tuesday. Or not.

Hopefully, the ground will not rise to meet the snow per Tom's
submarine description. However, if it happens, please take some
ACTUAL photos.

38F now in Santa Cruz CA. It's not cold enough yet to snow, but it's
trying. NWS has issued fire and high wind warnings of 20 to 30 mph
for Saturday and Sunday which will likely be accompanied by power
outages. Meanwhile, my steel wood burner is partly disassembled and
awaiting time for me to flux weld a crack and other repairs.
<https://photos.app.goo.gl/LLYM5DPaHAUMhM8z5>

What else can go wrong?

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 10/27/2023 9:41 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:22:32 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 10/26/2023 8:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> The ACTUAL photo of the North Pole surfacing us here: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402650022935117832/
>
>>> Incidentally, the North Pole did not surface. It was the various
>>> submarines that were photographed after surfacing.
>
>> "the North Pole is expected to be ice free in
>> summer somewhere between 2030 and 2050."
>>
>> And I'm told first snow here will be Tuesday. Or not.
>
> Hopefully, the ground will not rise to meet the snow per Tom's
> submarine description. However, if it happens, please take some
> ACTUAL photos.
>
> 38F now in Santa Cruz CA. It's not cold enough yet to snow, but it's
> trying. NWS has issued fire and high wind warnings of 20 to 30 mph
> for Saturday and Sunday which will likely be accompanied by power
> outages. Meanwhile, my steel wood burner is partly disassembled and
> awaiting time for me to flux weld a crack and other repairs.
> <https://photos.app.goo.gl/LLYM5DPaHAUMhM8z5>
>
> What else can go wrong?
>
>

Zombie apocalypse.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971