A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

I think we should leave this group for P&S's



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old December 19th 08, 04:38 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default I think we should leave this group for P&S's

"J. Clarke" wrote in message

DRS wrote:
"Stephen Bishop" wrote in message


[...]

However, regardless of camera types or style of photography, forums
such as these always seem to degrade to discussions of "my camera
is
better than yours" kinds of things. This has been true for
decades,
even before Al Gore invented the internet.


Another urban myth. He never said that.


You're quibbling over a word.


More than one word. Read the article I linked to.


  #42  
Old December 19th 08, 04:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default I think we should leave this group for P&S's

"J. Clarke" wrote in message

DRS wrote:


[...]

You're embarrassing yourself. The IPCC's forecasts were too
conservative (for political reasons the probability that climate
change is anthropogenic was downgraded from virtually certain
(P0.99) to very likely (P0.9)). The forecasted effects on
physical
and biological systems are occurring earlier than predicted. See
"Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic
climate
change", Nature, v453 n7193 pp353-357, a metastudy of 29,000 studies
in the literature.


All of which assume that the change is anthropogenic?


Most do. The peer reviewed literature runs about 9 studies for versus 1
against and has done for some years.

We know, for example, that the contemporary increase in CO2 is because of
burning fossil fuels because of things like changes in the percentage of
atmospheric carbon13. We also know that climate models cannot account for
the observed trends without incorporating anthropogenic factors. Natural
factors alone are insufficient to explain the observations. That's the
point of the cited metastudy. It's about matching observational studies -
29,000 of them - with the IPCC's forecasts. Greenland's base ice is melting
earlier than predicted. Spring is coming earlier and Winter is shorter.
Climate sensitive species are migrating to areas they've never been in
before. And so forth. All predicted and all observed happening too soon
according to the predictions.

And if you really believe this then why are you using power of any
kind? Because giving up such things as computers and private jets is
for _other_ people?


How do you know I don't source my electricity from carbon neutral sources?
And I assure you I don't have a private jet. In any event, it isn't
necessary to go back to the Stone Age to stop climate change, no matter how
hysterical the deniers get. It's all about balances. Industrialised
society has thrown the global carbon cycle out of equilibrium and now we
have to stop increasing our carbon output until a new equilibrium is reached
that we can live with. Even if we waved a magic wand and stopped producing
any carbon at all that process will still take a few decades but the
alternative - business as usual - will result in a new equilbrium that will
cause extreme hardship across the planet.

Anyway, I'd rather be talking about photography in here but the ideological
selfishness and stupidity of the deniers along with their pseudo-science
just gets too much sometimes. Unfortunately, their stupidity is dangerous.


  #43  
Old December 19th 08, 10:51 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default I think we should leave this group for P&S's

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:32:17 -0600, "HEMI-Powered"
wrote:

Eric Stevens added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Actually, POSH was how to select the coolest side of the ship
when travelling backwards and forwards between England and
India.

So many think, but it's not so -- see Wikipedia.


Now you've made me go and look up the New Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary (NSOED). It gives three main meanings (1)
a small coin (2) Nonsense, Rubbish (3) Smart, stylish,
luxurious etc. It goes on to say "There is no evidence to
support ... 'Port Out, Starboard Home"

This was meant to be a joke on why I don't think that "alt" is an
acronym, but POSH does mean that, it is just debatable what the
words were meant to convey. The reason the dictionary doesn't
define "port outbound, starboard inbound" is that it doesn't
include obsolete definitions for terms and acronyms, only words
generally considered to be current.


The NSOED is compiled on a historical basis and gives all the old and
obsolete usages and when they were used.

There are literally tens of
thousands of legitimate words in the English language that won't be
found in a standard dictionary no matter how think or how new, but
they can be found with some judicious Googling.


If you know of any like that you should let the editors of the Oxford
Dictionary know. They try to include everything.



Eric Stevens
  #44  
Old December 19th 08, 11:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default I think we should leave this group for P&S's

On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:57:33 +1100, "DRS"
wrote:

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message

DRS added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

"Stephen Bishop" wrote in message


[...]

However, regardless of camera types or style of photography,
forums such as these always seem to degrade to discussions of
"my camera is better than yours" kinds of things. This has
been true for decades, even before Al Gore invented the
internet.

Another urban myth. He never said that.

He didn't make an actual quote to that effect, but the Head Green
Nazi DID take credit for the Internet's success in a number of
speeches and interviews during the two Clinton campaigns and
while VP. Gore is an empty suit who has no credible technical


Gore's actual claim, supported by no less an Internet luminary thant Vince
Cerf, was "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward
a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our
country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our
educational system." See http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp.

education, training or ability yet people continue to bow down to
him as if he were the god of technology. If the Far Left Loons
attempt to force our great country down the road that Gore wants
them to, as do Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman, and Babara Boxer to
name just a few, your electricity rates with quadruple, vehicle
CAFE will rise to 50, maybe 60 mpg effectively legislating
anything but city cars out of existance, and we'll revert to the
Socialst ideas on energy that France has which mandates that
people provide a percentage of their own through renewable means
and that people have a quota to meet to reduce their energy year
over year. Gore, Obama, and the rest of the Green Nazis really
aren't interested in saving the planet, it they did, they'd
listen more to scientists who truly understand the problems.


He is listening to the scientists. It is a shame you clearly are not.
Climatologists have been concerned about anthropegenically caused global
warming for over fifty years.


Bull****. Twenty years ago they were worried about cooling.

The studies in the peer reviewed literature
are overwhelming in their conclusions. Next you'll be denying evolution.


See http://www.heartland.org/custom/semo.../pdf/22835.pdf

Instead, what these clown are about is power - power over you,
power to conduct social engineering using money derived by wealth
redistribution. Some call this Socialism or Marxism while others
call it Fascism, it is really both.


Denying reality is no way to preserve liberty. Humans have created the
current climate change. Humans can and should do something about it.




Eric Stevens
  #45  
Old December 21st 08, 08:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default I think we should leave this group for P&S's

"Eric Stevens" wrote in message


[...]

He is listening to the scientists. It is a shame you clearly are
not. Climatologists have been concerned about anthropegenically
caused global warming for over fifty years.


Bull****. Twenty years ago they were worried about cooling.


That myth is not supported in the peer reviewed literature. See
http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/15...-89-9-1325.pdf.

The studies in the peer reviewed literature
are overwhelming in their conclusions. Next you'll be denying
evolution.


See http://www.heartland.org/custom/semo.../pdf/22835.pdf


Ah, Fred Singer, one of the perpetrators and perpetuators of the "but they
were worried about global cooling in the 1970s" myth debunked above,
pretending that the 2,500 scientists of the IPCC and the 192 governmental
representatives (one from every country in the world) that approved the
wording of AR4, are engaged in a giant conspiracy to deprive the world of
SUVs while he and his apolitical colleagues from the tobacco and Big
Oil-funded right-wing think tank, the Heartland Institute, are bravely
speaking out for science. As if.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why do they always leave out one feature?! RPS Digital Photography 22 August 22nd 07 08:42 PM
Why do they always leave out one feature?! RPS Digital Point & Shoot Cameras 10 August 22nd 07 08:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.