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

Obviously Europeans have a different appoach to such (as well as Americans in European courts).

I'd thought that ISBNs and trademarks were regarded the same all over the world.

Sorry for giving my misinterpretation.

You weren't incorrect Walter. Copyright does protect page layout.

okie wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

okie wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

If 20,000yrs ago the Global average temp was only 9 degree lower, then that meant that prior to this century the global average has gone up on average 0.045 degrees per century.

If an increase of 1.3 degrees over the last century is not "alarming" then you've got a screw loose or you simply do not care.

T
K
O

Spectacular math you illustrate, Diest, but where do you get the idea that global temperatures warmed at an average, thus apparently implied constant rate of .045 degrees per century..... and for 20,000 years?

I'll honor none of your requests until you retract your comment.

T
K
O

Now that seems like a very creative way of admitting that you do not know the answer to okie's question!

By the way, the above 3000+ year sea temperature graph was for the Sargasso Sea.

No. You are incorrect. I'd love nothing more than to answer. All okie has to do is retract his/her false statement. highlighted in red above is the worst math assumption I have ever read.

T
K
O

No need to retract it, diest. You implied by your calculation that the temperature went up that amount per century, simply because that was the average, and I pointed out your mistake. You implied a false assumption.

You should put fewer words in my mouth and put more marbles in yours sir.

Averages do not imply a constant change with respect to time. I can drive form New york to San Fransisco and record my average speed the entire trip. I can tell you my average speed, but nowhere in that statement will I have implied anything about a constant speed. You've got two statements to withdraw now.

T
K
O

Diest TKO wrote:

okie wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

okie wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

If 20,000yrs ago the Global average temp was only 9 degree lower, then that meant that prior to this century the global average has gone up on average 0.045 degrees per century.

If an increase of 1.3 degrees over the last century is not "alarming" then you've got a screw loose or you simply do not care.

T
K
O

Spectacular math you illustrate, Diest, but where do you get the idea that global temperatures warmed at an average, thus apparently implied constant rate of .045 degrees per century..... and for 20,000 years?

I'll honor none of your requests until you retract your comment.

T
K
O

Now that seems like a very creative way of admitting that you do not know the answer to okie's question!

By the way, the above 3000+ year sea temperature graph was for the Sargasso Sea.

No. You are incorrect. I'd love nothing more than to answer. All okie has to do is retract his/her false statement. highlighted in red above is the worst math assumption I have ever read.

T
K
O

No need to retract it, diest. You implied by your calculation that the temperature went up that amount per century, simply because that was the average, and I pointed out your mistake. You implied a false assumption.

You should put fewer words in my mouth and put more marbles in yours sir.

Averages do not imply a constant change with respect to time. I can drive form New york to San Fransisco and record my average speed the entire trip. I can tell you my average speed, but nowhere in that statement will I have implied anything about a constant speed. You've got two statements to withdraw now.

T
K
O

If I drove to San Francisco from New York last year, my average speed would be a pretty low figure in miles per hour if, it was averaged over the entire year, akin to your 20,000 year average. Thus whenever you got in your car and went 60 mph, you imply that in comparison the speed would be very alarming. I pointed out your stupid comparison, which it was, diest, as obviously 60 mph is not an alarming speed, nor do I think the current climate change is anywhere near alarming as you claim it to be. It was a false comparison, plain and simple. If you are the scientist you claim to be, I would not recommend anyone hire you to do any work, and I hope our tax dollars are not supporting your work.

[
You still have two statements to retract.

1) That anyone believes that CO2 is the exclusive cause of CC/AGW.
2) That an average implies a constant change with respect to time.

T
K
O

Seems like a lot of sound and fury over very little. However I do like the look of these eighth order nested quotes. Nice geometric patterns.

Being on a committee charged with upgrading our local church's website, we all have been looking at the work designed by a number of prospective webmasters. Some do manage to create uniquely different layouts for different clients, but for most they tend to design a web site in the same way for all including preference for certain colors, use of graphics, type faces, back ground, etc. Just like I use a preferred layout and style for pamphlets, flyers, brochures, newsletters etc. that I design.

It isn't hard to believe that Dr. Seitz used what was familiar to him in a design for the Petition Project with no sense of any kind that it would be identified with anything other than the Petition Project.

Foxfyre wrote:

Being on a committee charged with upgrading our local church's website, we all have been looking at the work designed by a number of prospective webmasters. Some do manage to create uniquely different layouts for different clients, but for most they tend to design a web site in the same way for all including preference for certain colors, use of graphics, type faces, back ground, etc. Just like I use a preferred layout and style for pamphlets, flyers, brochures, newsletters etc. that I design.

It isn't hard to believe that Dr. Seitz used what was familiar to him in a design for the Petition Project with no sense of any kind that it would be identified with anything other than the Petition Project.

Seitz didn't do the fake article. He only wrote the letter that went with it. Your argument has no bearing on the fake article since Seitz NEVER wrote it or laid it out.

If the design isn't original then yes, it isn't covered by copyright. If the design is associated with a particular magazine or other publication then yes, it probably is covered by copyright.

No, it isn't covered by copyright unless the design is clearly a protected trademark of a licensed entity. A magazine or website or newspaper or stationary layout cannot be copyrighted.

Let's see...it is 8 degrees...just had 3 foot snow storm.