71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Mar, 2007 04:16 pm
miniTAX wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Do you actually have any other purpose here besides arguing against those who believe that we are affecting the environment negatively with our actions?
No. Now, your answer please. http://images.forum-auto.com/icones/smilies/cubitus.gif


If you refuse to answer the original question, I don't see any reason not to assume that you are little better than a troll. Your sole purpose in this thread and on this message board is to pick fights with those who disagree with you about Global Warming.

There's no reason to engage you in conversation if you can't even be honest with yourself about your reason for coming to A2K.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 09:36 am
In the true spirit of the 'ignore it if it doesn't fit' critique, here is another scientist chiming in on the solar theory for global warming:

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist SaysWHOLE ARTICLE HERE
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:06 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, ... ... ...


Foxfyre wrote:

Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists.


Perhaps, because he ...

http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/5359/01cy4.th.jpg

Source

More info: http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:12 am
Well thanks for the link, Walter, but my Russian is a little rusty these days.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:18 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Well thanks for the link, Walter, but my Russian is a little rusty these days.


Shocked So the links are only in English in Germany? What a miracle - actually, what two miracles, since both sites are in English here (as is the copied graphic).


But nevertheless: thanks very much were trying to read before you answer, Foxfyre.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:18 am
foxfire wrote :

Quote:


of course , nothing is impossible , but for the time being i am quite willing to pay a little more attention to those scientists saying that humans make a substantial contribution to global warming .
as a layperson i cannot see any reason why i should pay more attention to "one scientist's controversial theory" , than the many other scientists
who do not agree with him .
perhaps i'll have to change my opinion some day ... but for now ...
hbg
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:20 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Well thanks for the link, Walter, but my Russian is a little rusty these days.


You don't follow links, do you?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:21 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Well thanks for the link, Walter, but my Russian is a little rusty these days.


Shocked So the links are only in English in Germany? What a miracle - actually, what two miracles, since both sites are in English here (as is the copied graphic).


But nevertheless: thanks very much were trying to read before you answer, Foxfyre.


I'm sorry Walter, but when I click on the link it comes up in Russian. As does the graph when you click on it. I can't find any English or German there anywhere.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:26 am
You'll note that some part of WH's link got cut off a bit -

http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm

Try that, and if that shows up in Russian, I don't know why it would...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:27 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Well thanks for the link, Walter, but my Russian is a little rusty these days.


Shocked So the links are only in English in Germany? What a miracle - actually, what two miracles, since both sites are in English here (as is the copied graphic).


But nevertheless: thanks very much were trying to read before you answer, Foxfyre.


I'm sorry Walter, but when I click on the link it comes up in Russian. As does the graph when you click on it.



If you click on the table, you'll see a screenshot of an English table of the direction of the Pulkovo Observatory.

The link that says "Source" leads to the English version of the Pulkovo Observatory website.

The last link seems to broken due to A2K's phpbb format and produces a Russian error site (granted), but simply copying and pasting the URL into your browser would have led you to the right website...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:30 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
You'll note that some part of WH's link got cut off a bit -

http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm

Try that, and if that shows up in Russian, I don't know why it would...

Cycloptichorn


Yup, I get Russian with that one too.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:32 am
Not here - that's why I copied/pasted from the English website (graphic) and the links from the English websites as well (you even can see "English" on the given link - at least here.

Funny that it doesn't work - I even went to my two other computers to try it: English there as well.

Sorry.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:34 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Yup, I get Russian with that one too.


Perhaps your computer is ... hacked?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:35 am
Wow - it cut off my link in the middle too!

Try copy and pasting this into your address bar instead of clicking -

http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm

Cheers

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:36 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Not here - that's why I copied/pasted from the English website (graphic) and the links from the English websites as well (you even can see "English" on the given link - at least here.

Funny that it doesn't work - I even went to my two other computers to try it: English there as well.

Sorry.


No problem. I had already figured out how to get it in English shortly after my initial post. But I don't see any inherent problem with the theory in Russian or English. It's one more scientist's opinion, and he certainly is not the only one to hold it as might be inferred from the biased slant of the writer of the article I posted.

But no problem. I certainly didn't expect to change anybody's opinion. The AGW crowd will continue to discount any alternate theories, the anti-AGW crowd will keep putting their scientific opinion out there, and people like me who don't know which is right will keep giving consideration to both points of view until one or the other is sufficiently persuasive to choose.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:36 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Wow - it cut off my link in the middle too!

Try copy and pasting this into your address bar instead of clicking -

http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm

Cheers

Cycloptichorn



Yeppers.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:38 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Not here - that's why I copied/pasted from the English website (graphic) and the links from the English websites as well (you even can see "English" on the given link - at least here.

Funny that it doesn't work - I even went to my two other computers to try it: English there as well.

Sorry.


No problem. I had already figured out how to get it in English shortly after my initial post. But I don't see any inherent problem with the theory in Russian or English. It's one more scientist's opinion, and he certainly is not the only one to hold it as might be inferred from the biased slant of the writer of the article I posted.

But no problem. I certainly didn't expect to change anybody's opinion. The AGW crowd will continue to discount any alternate theories, the anti-AGW crowd will keep putting their scientific opinion out there, and people like me who don't know which is right will keep giving consideration to both points of view until one or the other is sufficiently persuasive to choose.


I just think that he was pointing out that the scientist isn't a climatologist.

When the 'signed letter' by concerned sci. were going around, one of the major criticisms was that many of the singiatories weren't climatologists, IIRC....

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:40 am
Okay, now that everybody seems to have figured out how to go to the Pulkovo Observatory website, let's go back to Walter's/Foxfyre's original posts, shall we?


Walter Hinteler wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, ... ... ...


Foxfyre wrote:

Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists.


Perhaps, because he ...

http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/5359/01cy4.th.jpg

Source

More info: http://www.spbrc.nw.ru/PH/archive/!english/org/gao.htm




Now, can anybody point out to me were the website lists Habibullo Abdussamatov as "head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia"? Is it the wrong website?

Just curious....
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 10:50 am
That's why I gave additionally a second link ... which lists a couple of more Russian scientists.

(I even wouldn't mind if he wasn't a climatologist.)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2007 11:38 am
But the pro-AGW crowd doesn't seem to mind at all that the huge majority of that 'consensus of scientists' signing off on AGW are not climatologists either.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 09/20/2024 at 03:23:35