Search results

You have no problems with kief? Do you put it on top of your herb? Do you shake after a hit? I always thought kief would gum-up the screen.

Doesn't it concern you that some of the arguments you use for non-global warming are plainly wrong? Is it hard to see because your part of that herd? Are the herd-masters playing to your willful ignorance? You listen to a guy who embellished his credentials, but I bet Al Gore's embellishments...

You don't see long term trends if you follow short term variations. That is why stock pickers will look at the 30 day average. Same goes for long term global trends. Year to year fluctuations don't tell very much. And when you use the peeks of the highly variable monthly figures--like from your...

If you're talking about solar activity, it has shown little to no long term trend since the 1950's. Consequently, any correlation between the sun and the climate ended in the 1970's when the modern global warming trend began. No lie. You're wrong. Volcanoes emit around 0.3 Gigatonnes of CO2 per...

What's your proof that the cooling?

The accord is the accord. That's what they agreed to. The greenies aren't very happy about it. The Guardian says it's extremely weak. How could you think it's so bad?

The Copenhagen Accord is here:http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/climate-change/copenhagen-accord-4.30pm.pdf There is no mention of a global tax on financial transactions.

That sounds right.

But fewer brains wouldn't be right. Would it? That's plural. I like "less smarts".

Really? Do you have credible sources for that?

Yes, as you say, they incorporated the real measurements for the latter years because it makes sense. They figured it out to.

Couldn't dig up much dirt. Please inform me. Looks like a decent charitable foundation to me. Just who is lyng for whom.

No, They used the "trick" so as not to rely on the less reliable tree ring data. This article addresses the tree ring decline: Reduced sensitivity of recent tree-growth to temperature at high northern latitudes

Your right. I thought it was significant that a former skeptic would sign-off on the report; that the science/evidence at the time was such that he was persuaded to conclude human activity was a factor. When asked about the report, Bush said "that's bureaucracy".

When did the climate scientist lie about mj?

The international negotiations will center on cap-and-trade and offset schemes to combat global warming, not a global carbon tax or strict regulation that are being called for by some. Relax.

What tax? Are you talking about Cap and Trade. It worked for acid rain. Rape, pillage and enslave? Get a grip.

Hey! I've been looking for a franchise opportunity. You'd have complete control and there would be a smaller market for Knock-offs. Roy Kroc did well that way.

What are you talking about? Did you read the article? No chart there. I was talking about the conversion of Dr. Richard S. Lindzen of M.I.T. Do think they scared him with a chart?

Read this article about the report Bush ordered from the National Academy of Sciences:http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/07/science/07WARM.html?scp=5&sq=bush%20global%20warming&st=cse He's a skeptic, so he made sure like minded scientists were appointed to the panel. They're not skeptics anymore...