Quote:
It's just amazing how consistent you are at rewriting reality for your own comfort and taking the corresponding political position...as far as I can recall, you've done it for every issue we've covered
Beh - I didn't know which side of it it was. I really don't care. My bad. It seems like a CYA either way. My position on this is mostly shit talking to piss you off Steve. I don't really care that much. THAT should be obvious by now.
And... look below.
___________________________________
Quote:
there wouldn't be republicans if women got there shit together.
Funny, my wife is the conservative and her shit is together. We have 6 kids. Have you every thought that women went to the polls and said, you know what, I don't want Hillary to be the first woman to represent my sex as president? Because that is what she said. I mean, she disliked Trump, but she felt he was the lesser of two evils, and didn't think so much about doing the historic let's let a woman be president. She said, FUCK NO to Hillary. Instead of trying to let her sexual organs determine how she should vote.
If you want to know what they actually think, instead of assuming they want to be sexists and vote for somebody because of their sex, maybe you should try conversing with a conservative woman instead of guessing. Surprise, they aren't stupid either.
I supported Johnson. (shrugs, inserts dick joke)
___________________________________
Quote:
so, still no increase in TSI
k.
I showed that the increase in TSI works with the increase in temperature, if you can comprehend that the TSI is taken as an absolute, and if you apply the absolute range to temperature also, it shows exactly the same trend.
Just 2 or 3 pages back I showed how the changes in TSI are affecting...well, Uranus also: https://phys.org/news/2017-12-sun-re...tness.html#jCp
AND Svensmark's paper just came out last month. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpr...3-vs-solar.jpg
Quote:
Red curve is the variation in the local supernova rate, and therefore also the variation in cosmic ray flux during the last 500 Myr. The colored band indicates climatic periods: warm periods (red), cold periods (blue), glacial periods (white and blue hatched bars) and finally peak glaciations (black and white hatched bars). The proportions of carbon-13 in sediments (d13C in parts per mill) over the past 500 Myr, shown in the scattered points, reflect changes in the carbon cycle. d13C carries information on the burial of organic material in sediments, and is therefore a record of bio-productivity. Blue dashed curve is smoothed d13C. Circles are d13C from marine carbonates, open circles with a star symbol, Jurassic to Neogene, are a carbon isotopic record of organic matter. Note that there are three brief gaps in the d13C data (end-Silurian, mid-Carboniferous and mid Jurassic). Abbreviations for geological periods are Cm ?Cambrian, O ? Ordovician, S ? Silurian, D ? Devonian, C ? Carboniferous, P ? Permian, Tr ? Triassic, J ? Jurassic, K ? Cretaceous, Pg ?Palaeogene, Ng ? Neogene.
Still, Models have all failed. Predictions have all failed, no matter what you think the TSI is doing or not doing. Trying to distract from that with a I-can't-take-time-to-actually-read-shit fallacy or the I-am-ignoring-everything-you-said-that-ruins-my-position fallacy doesn't help.
_______________________________
Quote:
Also still hasn't explained to us how satellite measurements work or why they should be more reliable than ground stations. His position seems to be "satellites are magic so of course climate stations are wrong"
Ignoring what I posted doesn't mean I didn't say it. I linked to the Fall et al paper that shows the majority of surveyed Surface Stations have a warming trend and are affected by local warming affects. I have mentioned it nearly a half dozen times. I mentioned I was actually part of the program, and I walked down and surveyed the local sites.
I also went over the problems with the satellite data source, the biggest point being there is no reference for it, and one dataset. I said that in my first post on the subject some 46 pages back or so. I also said that the satellite dataset matches weather balloon data sets, which also can register warming at the 300mbar and other levels (where the warming is supposed to happen due to the theory), and the surface data from that the raw station data matches surface warming the satellites register also, but the satellite takes a far higher resolution dataset, and also does it more than 6 ft from the ground.
And I showed that satellite data matches rural surface stations, in fact, satellite data matches the stations that fall between the 1-2 rated locations and the 3-5 rates locations, but after that the NOAA adjusted dataset is warmer than either of those datasets. Funny how that is. They made 1+2 equal 4. Huh.
That you guys keep ignoring the wealth of data I have brought forward to make this point only shows that your belief system makes you blind to this information.
It isn't that I haven't proved my point, several times over. It is that your reading comprehension is just piss poor when thrown contrary or damaging data, and you end up bringing up positions again and again as if you had a blinding case of cognitive dissonance. Yeah, there are examples of mine being so through out here - but on this, my point has been made overly so, and now you guys are resorting to being obtuse because you know you are wrong. Or, may I suggest a Plexotomy? That might help.
_______________________________
The Clinton Foundation is being investigated for fraud. An interesting bit:
Quote:
The first time the Clinton Foundation was investigated, between 2001 and 2005, then-FBI Director Robert Mueller, then-Deputy Attorney General James Comey, and others could not seem to find obvious and escalating frauds as a supposed presidential library complex in Little Rock, Arkansas, also ?fought HIV/AIDS internationally? from unregistered offices in New York and Massachusetts without ever obtaining required audits of worldwide activities.
Strangely, as the first investigation wound down, evidence in the public domain suggests that the Clinton Foundation also defrauded the National Archivist by making demonstrably false representations in a binding legal agreement.
There is more, lots more. Turns out the same few people each time. Out of tens of thousands. Huh. And now when others are looking into it, turns out, like the emails, there are some serious problems.
And on the prepared statement, and how politic hacking is involved:
Quote:
x-FBI Director James Comey?s original statement closing out the probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server was edited by subordinates to remove five separate references to terms like ?grossly negligent? and to delete mention of evidence supporting felony and misdemeanor violations, according to copies of the full document. Comey also originally concluded that it was ?reasonably likely? that Clinton?s nonsecure private server was accessed or hacked by hostile actors though there was no evidence to prove it. But that passage was also changed to the much weaker ?possible,? the memos show...The full draft, with edits, leaves little doubt that Comey originally wrote on May 2, 2016 that there was evidence that Clinton and top aides may have violated both felony and misdemeanor statutes, though he did not believe he could prove intent before a jury.
And:
Quote:
While Mueller has prosecuted two Trump associates for lying to the FBI, the Obama Justice Department gave a pass to Mrs. Clinton and her subordinates, who gave the FBI misinformation about such key matters as whether Clinton understood markings in classified documents and whether her aides knew about her homebrew server system during their State Department service...The irregularities in the Clinton-emails investigation are breathtaking: the failure to use the grand jury to compel the production of key physical evidence; the Justice Department?s collaboration with defense lawyers to restrict the FBI?s ability to pursue obvious lines of inquiry and examine digital evidence; immunity grants to suspects who should have been charged with crimes and pressured to cooperate; allowing subjects of the investigation to be present for each other?s FBI interviews and even to act as lawyers for Clinton, in violation of legal and ethical rules;
Quote:
Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills both gave false statements to the FBI about their knowledge of the "homebrew" server. Rather than having the specter of prosecution hung over their heads, they were granted sweeping and generous immunity deals, under which they protected themselves and their boss. And they weren't the only ones:
A computer technician who deleted Clinton emails from her server in March 2015 after a congressional subpoena had been issued for them, originally lied to the FBI during his interviews, memos show. The witness?s name was redacted from documents released by the FBI but he was identified as an employee of a computer firm that helped maintained Clinton?s email server. His admission of false statements came one day after the Comey statement was already being drafted, investigators told The Hill. The computer employee originally told the FBI in a February 2016 interview that he did not recall making any deletions from Clinton?s server in March 2015, FBI records show. But then on May 3, 2016, the same employee in a subsequent FBI interview told agents he had an ?oh shit moment? and in late March 2015 deleted Clinton?s email archive from the server, according to FBI documents reviewed by The Hill...the FBI decided not to pursue criminal charges against the witness, and instead gave the technician an immunity deal so he could correct his story, congressional investigators said.
On those emails, seems a Weiner is involved also:
Quote:
Weiner, the disgraced former New York congressman, was served divorce papers by former Clinton confidante Huma Abedin in May of last year.
The new tranche of emails on Weiner?s computer appear to emanate from Abedin?s use of a non-State Department email address located on Clinton?s private server as well as from Abedin?s personal Blackberry.
According to the press release issued by Judicial Watch earlier this afternoon, the 18 classified emails are broken down as follows:
There are five new classified emails among 147 new Abedin work-related documents released by the State Department on Friday, December 29, 2017.
Thirteen emails containing classified information were also found on the Weiner laptop computer that had already been released to the public. This classified material includes discussions about Saudi Arabia, The Hague, Egypt, South Africa, Zimbabwe, the identity of a CIA official, Malawi, the war in Syria, Lebanon, Hamas, and the PLO.
More to come. Going to be an interesting year 2018...