[Gasification] Energy Research Habitat

Thu Feb 8 09:47:50 CST 2007

Disrespectful.....pardon me..... I do not know who is the ruler here,  
are you the one, owner of the list.

torsdag 8. feb 2007 kl. 16:31 skrev Roger Samson:

> Kenn
>
> Please respect this list its completely disrespectful, I have wrote  
> you and
> others.
> roger
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org
> [mailto:gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of kenn  
> johnsen
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 10:29 AM
> To: gasification at listserv.repp.org
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Energy Research Habitat
>
> Man, at last, one who is speaking out, sometimes I feel I am bloody
> alone.
>
>
> torsdag 8. feb 2007 kl. 16:06 skrev Mark & Elena Gallmeier:
>
>> To all,
>>
>> Earlier in this thread we were invited to look at this page
>> http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/ as a proffered proof of rising
>> CO2
>> levels.
>>
>> I did.
>>
>> Now I have some questions for the Global-Warming Is
>> Man-Made-And-Here's-What-Must-Be-Done-Now-To-Save-Us-From-Apocalypse
>> Cultists.
>>
>> 1.  Why is a single CO2 data source - taken from the top of the  
>> world's
>> largest and one of the most active volcanoes - Mauna Loa - evidence of
>> anything?
>>
>> 2.  Why did the second lowest recorded annual increase,  0.45, only
>> occur in
>> 1992?  This was 33 years after that station began operations.  Why is
>> there
>> so much variation in the reported annual increases when the world-wide
>> growth in industrial consumption of fossil fuels over that time period
>> has
>> been nearly uniform?  And the rate of fossil fuel usage and presumbly
>> CO2
>> production increasing at higher annual rates?
>>
>> I have looked deeply into this issue in the past.  This includes the
>> outrageous behavior of Michael Mann and his cabal over MBH-98 and the
>> IPCC
>> 98 report with its famous "Hockey Stick" graph of temperatures
>> (produced by
>> computer code Mann still refuses to disclose completely).  I
>> discovered peer
>> review in this field is typically not done, and when it is done it's
>> usually
>> whiffle balled by a small closed network of academic backscratchers.
>> I have
>> read the conclusions of the NAS chief statistician, Dr. Wegman,
>> concerning
>> the sophomoric statistical incompetence of those regularly providing
>> major
>> input to the IPCC, and more regularly appearing as Global Warming
>> talking
>> heads on mass media or providing one liners to ideological agenda
>> driven
>> newspapers like The Guardian.
>>
>> I have watched Global Warming Cultists routinely hide their data  
>> and/or
>> their analytical algorithms from critical review.
>>
>> And I have watched these reports - calling for massive increases in
>> taxes,
>> bureaucratic power and grant funding to 'in' circles of researchers -
>> passed
>> out with the imprimatur of the world's most corrupt bureaucracy, the  
>> UN
>> Secretariat.
>>
>> No Sale.  Repeat, No Sale.  Back to study hall.  Do your homework over
>> again.
>>
>> 1.  Define what a useful average global temperature is.
>> 2.  Is this temperature increasing or decreasing?  If so, over what
>> time
>> frame?
>> 3.  What are the possible causes of these changes?
>> 4.  What mechanism(s) cause(s) changes in CO2 levels in the  
>> atmosphere?
>> 5.  What effect will changed CO2 levels have on 'temperature' and
>> 'weather'?
>> GloboWarming Cultists have been running into significant problems with
>> meterologists here.
>>
>> And we can usefully add, 100% transparent disclosure of all data and
>> methods
>> used to arrive at any conclusion proffered as a basis for public  
>> policy
>> changes.  This used to be a commonly accepted rule in reporting
>> 'scientific'
>> results funded with public monies and provided in an academic setting.
>>     A
>> rule that has since been discovered not to be currently enforced or
>> accepted
>> in the field of  'Global Warming'.
>>
>> I think we're entering a Dark Age where ignorance, superstititon,  
>> blind
>> prejudice and religious fanaticism are again gaining dominance.  An
>> era of
>> ignorant demogogues and calculating con-men disguised as moral leaders
>> leading ignorant emotionally driven mobs, all in the name of higher
>> morality.  Most unfortunately some of the worst cultists leading the
>> way
>> into this New Dark Age are waving around Ph.d's and claiming to be
>> 'scientific'.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:01:11 +0100
>>> From: kenn johnsen <kennj at webspeed.dk>
>>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Energy Research Habitat
>>> To: gasification at listserv.repp.org
>>> Message-ID: <AFC639F3-B763-11DB-84EC-000A95714808 at webspeed.dk>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=ISO-8859-1;  
>>> format=flowed
>>>
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>> I do not know about the Greenland ice core, I do not know if it is on
>>> the net, maybe I should look for it. What I have been looking at, is
>>> the Antarctic ice core data. And after looking for hours at the
>>> different graphic, I can not at my best will see that the temperature
>>> follow the CO2, I am convinced that the CO2 follow the temperature,
>>> and
>>> that means....? well if you call a swing of 10 degree F a stable
>>> temperature, what I understand it does not take much to make a
>>> difference, the difference between the little ice age and now was 2
>>> degree F between now and the viking time ( warmer ) was close to 10
>>> degree F.
>>> http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/
>>>
>>> Here is a graphic for the last 600,000,000 years, click warming hoax,
>>> nor do I see any here that CO2 have any to do with climate
>>> temperature.
>>> http://biocab.org/Academic_Curriculum.html
>>>
>>> Also how much does those gases mean, compare to water vapour, very
>>> little, this one is accused to to accept oil money by the believers,
>>> but that does not mean his calculation is wrong.
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gasification mailing list
>> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> gasification_listserv.repp.org
>> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
> gasification_listserv.repp.org
> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
>
>
>