XPost: soc.men, talk.environment, sci.environment
XPost: news.environment
From: BushIsATraitor@hotmail.com
> "VistaKing" wrote in message
> > When it comes to ascribing the origin of the observed surface warming of
> > the Earth, we use in part the History of the sun's output, not it's
future
> > output you fucking idiot.
"krp" wrote
> Guy the BEST of the BEST in meterology cannot ACCURATELY predict
> tonight's weather MUCH LESS global warming trends.
There is a difference between weather and climate you pathetic Moron.
Climate reflects a long term average over a region, while weather is what's
happening now. And just as statistics will not allow you to predict with
precision the height of the next person to enter a room, (weather), it is
statistically trivial to predict the average height of the next 30 people
entering the room once some statistical samples are made of the history of
people entering the room (climate).
Large Sample Size = More accuracy in the prediction of the mean and the
trendline.
Go learn some statistics W krp, you pathetic Moron.
> > The History of the sun's output is well known, having been measured
> > directly for over the last 100 years.
"krp" wrote
> NOPE. SOME of the sun's output has been measured. HOWEVER with
flares,
> sunspots and MASS EJECTIONS all those little tables go into a cocked hat!
Just like you don't know your weight because you haven't counted ever
fluff of dandruf and every scale of skin that has fallen off your head and
arms today.
Fuck off and die you ignorant Moron.
"krp" wrote
> Maybe you have missed that particularly in the past decade the sun has
been
> unusually active.
Total Solar energy emission is up slightly as directly measured. But
this has been studied at length and the conclusion is that the observed rise
in the Sun's output is trivaially small, and can account for less than 20%
or so of the observed warming.
Stupid.... Stupid... W krp.
> > Expert analysis - which you are clearly incapable of comprehending -
> > indicates that the Sun have contributed as much as but no more
than
> > about 20% of the observed warming.
"krp" wrote
> YOUR personal expert analysis? Because from what i read sceience is a
> bit divided on the issue.
I am trained in the sciences and read peer reviewed scientific journals.
You are a dung eater who reads OpEds in comic books, and can't even
understand that the journal reference that you posted earlier doesn't say
anything about total solar output.
Stupid... Stupid... W krp.
> >> How does that device "MEASURE" accurately the energy in a MASS
EJECTION?
>
> > What makes you think you need to do so ShitStain? Even a back of the
> > envelope calculation shows that they are many, many orders of magnitude
> > lower in average energy output than the normal background emissions from
> > the
> > sun.
"krp" wrote
> Maybe you missed the news that a recent mass ejection was well beyond
> the ability of our instrumentation to measure by several factors of
measure.
The thermometer you stick up your ass to measure your body temperature is
similarly incapable of measuring the temperature of a frying pan.
By your "logic", ahahahaha, a frying pan must therefore put out about as
much energy as the entire sun.
"krp" wrote
> Glad you are so confident that the sun is this docile little creature.
Yup. If it were not, Ignorant AmeriKKKan Cock Sucking Morons like you
wouldn't exist.
The campaign to Exterminate the AmeriKKKan state continues.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
