Re: The wheels on the wagon are coming off, coming off, coming off

[Ext User(Bonzo)]

"owl" <churchslc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature rise,
>
> This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> the last 11 minutes.
>
> Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.


2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING CO2
LEVELS?
Looks like a REAL inconvenient truth for AGW hysterics.
I give AGW hysteria another two years max.

Regards

Bonzo

"The Gulf Stream will not stop until the winds stop blowing and the earth stops
rotating" William Kininmonth, meteorologist

[Ext User(ExterminateAllRepubliKKKans)]

"Bonzo" <boozoo@optusnt.com.au> wrote in message
news:46b93b56$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!

1,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

Dispite the fact that 9 of the last numbers in the above series are below
11, the trend is still upward BOZO you ignorant Clown.

You are dumber than dirt.

[Ext User(owl)]

On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
>
> > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature rise,
>
> > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > the last 11 minutes.
>
> > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
>
> 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!

And the trend just keeps on rising.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

> Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING CO2
> LEVELS?

Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
properly juding the trend.

> Looks like a REAL inconvenient truth for AGW hysterics.

It looks like a grade-schooler could take you down in the first round
of the a debate. You'd get as far as the graph, and find your hat and
your ass in your hands.

> I give AGW hysteria another two years max.

That's about the same time it will take for this 1998 fixation to pass
through your system.

Hopefully it's only your need to be loyal that's making you swallow
this '1998-TheEnd' flimflam.

[Ext User(Bonzo)]

"owl" <churchslc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> >
> > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature rise,
> >
> > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > > the last 11 minutes.
> >
> > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
> >
> > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
>
> And the trend just keeps on rising.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Not according to the graph.
A picture is worth a million words.

> > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING CO2
> > LEVELS?
>
> Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> properly juding the trend.

Huh??

> > Looks like a REAL inconvenient truth for AGW hysterics.
>
> It looks like a grade-schooler could take you down in the first round
> of the a debate. You'd get as far as the graph, and find your hat and
> your ass in your hands.

A picture is worth a million words.

> > I give AGW hysteria another two years max.

--

Regards

Bonzo

"In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more than
$US50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to
demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one." Bob
Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

[Ext User(ExterminateAllRepubliKKKans)]

>> And the trend just keeps on rising.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png


"Bonzo" <boozoo@optusnt.com.au> wrote
> Not according to the graph.

Ya, according to the graph.

Let me tell you a little secret - Shit Licker. The trend is the red line.
Not the little dots.

Ahahahahahah... You fucking, Ignorant, KKKonservative, Loser.

[Ext User(owl)]

On Aug 8, 10:23 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
>
> > > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature rise,
>
> > > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > > > the last 11 minutes.
>
> > > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
>
> > > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
>
> > And the trend just keeps on rising.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
>
> Not according to the graph.
> A picture is worth a million words.

Yes, according to the graph. Try to find the red line on the graph.
C'mon, you can do it.

>
> > > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING CO2
> > > LEVELS?
>
> > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > properly juding the trend.

> Huh??

Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
properly juding the trend.


> > > Looks like a REAL inconvenient truth for AGW hysterics.
>
> > It looks like a grade-schooler could take you down in the first round
> > of the a debate. You'd get as far as the graph, and find your hat and
> > your ass in your hands.

> A picture is worth a million words.

Yea, now all you have to do is get a grade-schooler to explain it to
you.

Fact is, you can read it just fine, but you'd rather run around
speading crap about '98-theend'.

Pauvre Bozo.

[Ext User(Bonzo)]

"owl" <churchslc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186630945.874878.262820@r34g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
> On Aug 8, 10:23 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > >news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> >
> > > > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature
rise,
> >
> > > > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > > > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > > > > the last 11 minutes.
> >
> > > > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
> >
> > > > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > > > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
> >
> > > And the trend just keeps on rising.
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
> >
> > Not according to the graph.
> > A picture is worth a million words.
>
> Yes, according to the graph. Try to find the red line on the graph.


I see a plateau after 1998?
What do you see?

> >
> > > > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING
CO2
> > > > LEVELS?
> >
> > > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > > properly juding the trend.
>
> > Huh??
>
> Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> properly juding the trend.

Huh??


--

Regards

Bonzo

"The advocates of warming tend to be climate modelers with little observational
experience. Many of the modelers are not fully aware of how the real atmosphere
and ocean function. They rely more on theory than on observation." William M.
Gray, Professor Emeritus, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State
University and Research Fellow, Independent Institute

[Ext User(owl)]

On Aug 8, 11:47 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1186630945.874878.262820@r34g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 10:23 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > > > On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > >news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
>
> > > > > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature
> rise,
>
> > > > > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > > > > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > > > > > the last 11 minutes.
>
> > > > > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
>
> > > > > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > > > > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
>
> > > > And the trend just keeps on rising.
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
>
> > > Not according to the graph.
> > > A picture is worth a million words.
>
> > Yes, according to the graph. Try to find the red line on the graph.
>
> I see a plateau after 1998?

The question mark is appropriate.

> What do you see?

The trend line continues up. And you know it.

> > > > > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING
> CO2
> > > > > LEVELS?
>
> > > > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > > > properly juding the trend.
>
> > > Huh??
>
> > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > properly juding the trend.
>
> Huh??

Boring.

> Bozo

By bringing attention to it in a separate thread, as well as repeating
the nonsense here, you've highlighted the absurdity of it as a claim.

[Ext User(Bonzo)]

"owl" <churchslc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186630945.874878.262820@r34g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
> On Aug 8, 10:23 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > >news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> >
> > > > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature
rise,
> >
> > > > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys in
> > > > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter for
> > > > > the last 11 minutes.
> >
> > > > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
> >
> > > > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > > > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
> >
> > > And the trend just keeps on rising.
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
> >
> > Not according to the graph.
> > A picture is worth a million words.
>
> Yes, according to the graph. Try to find the red line on the graph.
> C'mon, you can do it.
>
> >
> > > > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE SOARING
CO2
> > > > LEVELS?
> >
> > > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > > properly juding the trend.
>
> > Huh??
>
> Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> properly juding the trend.

Stop it or you'll go blind, just like Poppycock.

>
> > > > Looks like a REAL inconvenient truth for AGW hysterics.
> >
> > > It looks like a grade-schooler could take you down in the first round
> > > of the a debate. You'd get as far as the graph, and find your hat and
> > > your ass in your hands.
>
> > A picture is worth a million words.

--

Regards

Bonzo

"I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I
view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically
unsound". Hurricane Expert Chris Landsea ( He resigned from the IPCC in 2005)

[Ext User(Bonzo)]

"owl" <churchslc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1186635888.306772.249640@19g2000hsx.googlegro ups.com...
> On Aug 8, 11:47 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1186630945.874878.262820@r34g2000hsd.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 8, 10:23 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > >news:1186601157.059488.299950@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> > > > > On Aug 7, 11:41 pm, "Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> > > > > > "owl" <church...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > > >news:1186517700.071649.50440@q75g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> >
> > > > > > > On Aug 7, 2:09 pm, matt_sykes <zzeb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I give it 2 more years max. When 2010 turns out to be nothing
> > > > > > > > special and we have had 11 years of no apprecieable temperature
> > rise,
> >
> > > > > > > This gets funnier every time it's dragged out. It's like two guys
in
> > > > > > > a boiling vat of water happy - the water hasn't got any hotter
for
> > > > > > > the last 11 minutes.
> >
> > > > > > > Your 1998 high-tide mark hit the skids, Jack.
> >
> > > > > > 2005 is only one year in ten and only SLIGHTLY HIGHER.
> > > > > > Nine out of ten are LOWER THAN 1998!
> >
> > > > > And the trend just keeps on rising.
> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
> >
> > > > Not according to the graph.
> > > > A picture is worth a million words.
> >
> > > Yes, according to the graph. Try to find the red line on the graph.
> >
> > I see a plateau after 1998?
>
> The question mark is appropriate.
>
> > What do you see?
>
> The trend line continues up. And you know it.

All I see is a plateau.


> > > > > > Why are all the other years between now and 1998 lower DESPITE
SOARING
> > CO2
> > > > > > LEVELS?
> >
> > > > > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > > > > properly juding the trend.
> >
> > > > Huh??
> >
> > > Because you're measuring them all to a single year, instead of
> > > properly juding the trend.
> >
> > Huh??

--

Regards

Bonzo

"Christians look to the Second Coming, Marxists look to the collapse of
capitalism, with the same mixture of fear and longing ... The discovery of
global warming filled a gap in the canon ... [and] provides justification for
the link between the sins of our past and the catastrophe of our future." John
Kay, The Financial Times