I laughed my Irish … off on that one!

(may the sun shine….ok, forget sun shine…)

I want to blatantly steal this to amuse the crowd on St. Paddy’s Day. — with proper attribution, of course…

“AGW Irish Wish

May the seas fall to leave you high and dry.
May the wind always blow up your skirt and chill your cheeks.
May sun shine…okay, forget sun shine…
the snow fall soft into your dread locks,
and until we meet again
may Gaiai (or whatever the hell her name is) hold your feet to the icecube for mocking her.”

HA HA HA HA I WAS IN MY OFFICE READING THIS AND I LAUGHED OUT LOUD.

BUSTED!

Surfing the net during work…but i needed that. Thanks Pamela.

;)

May the seas fall to leave you high and dry.
May the wind always blow up your skirt and chill your cheeks.
May sun shine…okay, forget sun shine…
the snow fall soft into your dread locks,
and until we meet again
may Gaiai (or whatever the hell her name is) hold your feet to the icecube for mocking her.

Well enjoy it. I wish that Irish Blessing had something to say about the “snow” falling soft on the fields.

(Maybe we should make it a Norwegian Blessing)

The pic currently on Spaceweather.com from your neck of the woods in the good ole’ PAC NW with the snowflakes with Venus visible in the background….is spectacular.

Well Mother Superior is about to get rocked by a blizzard. Will probably wrinkle her icy coat no doubt…or maybe enhance it.

Minimum temps near or below zero night after next…

Do women in Duluth wear skirts this time of year?? Just asking.

Chris
Norfolk, VA

May the road rise to meet you.
May the wind always be at your back.
May sun shine warm upon your face,
the rain fall soft upon your fields,
and until we meet again
may God hold you in the hollow of His hand.

Or just let him wander off in the woods. He will get lost like he did when he was VP.

Sorry, when you threw those thousands of references in the air I hadn’t noticed you had already invited me to catch three of them.

I will have a look through-it’ll be nice reading these old chestnuts again and will post a reply. I’m fairly tied up for a few days so will probably need to catch up with you on a new and relevant thread in due course, as you will see its a bit like a party here, where everyone crowds into a room to look at something then when a new attraction opens next door they all rush over there leaving the first room empty. Then the door shuts on it :)

If I see you posting I will give a reply, if you see me posting you can give me a reminder but give me till the weekend.

Best regards

Tonyb

‘conclusively’ ? ‘dissect’ ?

“I’ll let you pick, but I’d posit that far better minds than ours have already gone through the arguments. If you want to discuss individual studies, the journal in question would be the venue; if you want to disprove the basics, well:
# This is a list of every skeptic argument encountered online as well as how often each argument is used. http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

# How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

# Climate change: A guide for the perplexed http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462

# Anti-global heating claims – a reasonably thorough debunking http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/07/23/anti-global-heating-claims-a-reasonably-thorough-debunking/

# Responses to common contrarian arguments http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/index/#Responses

With respect, you are doing it again John, throwing thousands of things in the air and hoping some of them will stick. Weve all seen the ‘how to talk to a dimwitted climate sceptic’ web site and countered them.

Please take three individual proofs of global warming on the scale being suggested-you choose- so we can put them through the provable hypotheses test.

Thank you

TonyB

I’ll let you pick, but I’d posit that far better minds than ours have already gone through the arguments. If you want to discuss individual studies, the journal in question would be the venue; if you want to disprove the basics, well:

# This is a list of every skeptic argument encountered online as well as how often each argument is used. http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

# How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

# Climate change: A guide for the perplexed http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462

# Anti-global heating claims – a reasonably thorough debunking http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/07/23/anti-global-heating-claims-a-reasonably-thorough-debunking/

# Responses to common contrarian arguments http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/index/#Responses

Yes.

Oh, more? This is Hansen’s imaginary friend that tells him ghost stories:

In the early steps, it deletes some data (older than 1880) and then it makes up some data (in-fill missing by guessing…) then it changes some pseudo randomly (via “the reference station method”) then it deletes some more, then it homogenizes (I think that was about STEP2, the 4th or so step… gives you an idea right there…) after which it interpolates some more data, then does some more “reference station method” but this time on “anomalies” and in the final round does some more interpolation (based on other interpolations and “simulations” based on polar ice data – maybe from our broken satellite?) and then comes back for one final round of interpolation / reference station method anomaly homogenization. The result is the Global Anomaly Map that makes AGW believers pee themselves in fear.

That is a fairly accurate list of steps (well, up to the ‘pee’ part; that only holds for a very few…). See:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/gistemp-start_here/
if you want more including source code listings…

“Why is using short term weather as gloating /dreaming / wishing / against all evidence commenting such a popular meme for denying there are effects happening from man’s increasing the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere?”

To which I replied;

“Please confirm what this evidence is, and let’s stick to the legal term of that word i.e. ‘facts’. Theoretical models from Computers that even the IPCC say are flawed are inadmissable, wishing something is true is inadmissable, saying something is true lots of times is inadmissable, believing something is true just because someone with letters after their name has told you that is inadmissable.

Please provide me with three FACTS that back up what you say.”

Johnofmirecourt (great name) replied

“Providing you with far more than three:

* IPCC http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/
* IPCC-FAQ: http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/FAQ/wg1_faqIndex.html
* EPA-Basic Info http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html
* EDF-Basic Science http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/09/basic_science/
* The Discovery of Global Warming http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.html”

John, there are an awful lot of generalities here. Can you give me just three items that conclusively prove disastrous man made climate change so we can dissect them here and apply the scientific rule of testable hypothesis?

Thank you for your time

TonyB