Waterpup  

I love dolphins! They are some of the smartest animals on earth, definitely smarter than humans.

What’s being said below is that CO2 is an insignificant portion of the atmosphere and that man-made CO2 is but a fraction of the overall C02 in the atmosphere. Then the paper goes on to describe all the major factors that really do affect the heating and cooling of the earth. Point being that the trace amounts of CO2 cannot overwhelm these major influences. The focus is which our control over is totally insignificant, when in reality there are much larger and more significant influences that we have no control over.

Regarding a recent article that a big piece of an Arctic shelf had broken off George correctly pointed out that the Arctic ice pack is 30% larger than last years and the melt season is now over. He noted out that ice has the tensile strength of concrete which is basically nil. Then he pointed out that the earth rotates once every 24 hours causing a huge bulge of water to circumnavigate the earth, something us fisherman are familiar with as they are called tides. Superimpose brittle ice over this bulging water and inevitably, it breaks. Its been doing so forever.

Scientists also got a hold of the climate model that produced Al Gore’s now infamous hockey stick chart, they played with the model and found that no matter what data they put in, it always produced a hockey stick.

George Smith, one of the now 500 and growing Global Warming Denier scientists, post this excellent summary paper which really boils down how CO2 has no significant impact on climate change:

By Dr. Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ. Duffy received the New Zealand Science and Technology Silver Medal, in 2003 from The Royal Society of New Zealand. And has published 218 journal, peer-reviewed papers and conference papers including 10 patents and 62 technical reports. Duffy’s full bio is here: Geoff Duffy’s Work page ]

Another Dissenter: NZ Scientist: ‘Even doubling or tripling the amount of CO2′ will have ‘little impact’ on temps - Professor Geoffrey G. Duffy - September 4, 2008 nzclimatescience.net

Excerpt: But even doubling or trebling (tripling) the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will. [… ]It is also interesting to note that NASA’s Aqua satellite system has shown that the earth has been cooling since 1998. This corresponds with measurements from the Argos sub-ocean probes that the ocean is cooling. This is in stark contrast with the proposals from many ‘climate alarmists’. The solar effect is huge and overwhelming and there must be time delays in absorbance and build up in energy received by earth and ocean masses. But the warmer the Earth gets, the faster it radiates heat out into space. This is a self-correcting, self-healing process. […] The sun directly drives the El Nino–El Nina current motions that drive temperature changes world-wide. The sun sets up evaporative cycles, drives larger air and water currents or cycles, and changes weather patterns and therefore climate change. The varying degrees of lag and out-of-phase changes cause periodic oceanic oscillations. Even over our lifetime we have observed many weather pattern changes where we live. But what we observe (the ‘effect’) in a relatively small time-span cannot honestly be connected directly to any supposed ‘cause’ without investigating all the mechanisms that cause change. It is so easy to grab onto the notion that the increase in fossil-fuel burning and subsequent growth in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is directly the major cause. Even from season to season we see snow and ice-covered mountains thaw, and massive areas of the Antarctic ice shelf melt, but in just 6 or so months they are restored. We are not alarmed at these annual changes! So why can’t we see that climate changes occurring all over the world now (not as big as these dramatic annual changes) are simply similar but on a larger time-scale. We have the ice-core and sea-bed core evidence at least to show us that this has happened in recent centuries. These are in harmony as to changes in CO2 with time and variations in temperature over time. There is no indication that one causes the other! History also tells us that there have been significant cooling periods over the last 1,000 years. […] Unfortunately a lot of estimates and predictions are strongly based on theoretical computer models. Many now even trust models and their ‘theoretical results’ more than actual measurements and facts from reality. Computer analysis requires that the earth be ‘cut’ into small, separate areas (actually volumes), each being analysed for heat input/outputs and other gas/vapour fluxes. Even so the computational analysis domain size (basic computer grid elements) is huge, 150km x 150km by 1km high, with the current computer power. It is so large that the effects of even the very large clouds are not individually included; and that includes clouds in our visual horizon. The spatial resolution is therefore very poor. […] Warming is not occurring everywhere at once and hence ‘global warming’ is a misnomer. So what are the key players in ‘Climate Change’? The major driver is the sun. Warming depends on the sun. Cooling is due to the lack of sun’s energy. Radiant energy enters the earth’s atmosphere. Air (on a dry basis) consists mainly of nitrogen 78.08% and oxygen 20.94%. Of the 0.98% remaining, 95% of that (ie 0.934%), or almost all is the inert gas argon. Carbon dioxide CO2 is a trace. It is less than 400ppm (parts per million) or 0.04% of all the atmosphere (on a dry basis). Surprisingly, less than a fifth of that is man-made CO2 (0.008% of the total), and that is only since the beginning of the industrial era and the rapid increase in world population.
nzclimatescience.net

CLIMATE CHANGE - THE REAL CAUSES

“It is so easy to grab onto the notion that the increase in fossil-fuel burning and subsequent growth in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is directly the major cause. Even from season to season we see snow and ice-covered mountains thaw, and massive areas of the Antarctic ice shelf melt, but in just 6 or so months they are restored. We are not alarmed at these annual changes! So why can’t we see that climate changes occurring all over the world now (not as big as these dramatic annual changes) are simply similar but on a larger time-scale.” Professor Geoffrey Duffy, University of Auckland, NZ

CLIMATE CHANGE – The real causes

Professor Geoffrey G Duffy
DEng, PhD, BSc, ASTC Dip., FRS NZ, FIChemE, CEng

Climate is always changing, and always will. There are seasons. There are day-night (diurnal) cycles. At any one location, heat energy from the sun varies during the day. Energy from the sun is affected by local conditions and clouds. Heat absorption depends on whether it impacts water or land … and even then, the type of land (desert, forest, snow covered land), or the layout of the land (continental masses, or islands surrounded by seas). In some parts of the world temperatures are climbing on average, and in some areas they are dropping. Warming is not occurring everywhere at once and hence ‘global warming’ is a misnomer.
Read the rest of this entry »

Before seeing this video I was unsure who I was going to vote for. But I think Diddy just helped me make up my mind. After seeing this there’s no way I can vote for anyone he supports. Thanks Diddy!

Listen to this idiot just rambling nonsense. Does he really think anyone I mean ANYONE is going to take him serious? Is there anyone that will actually say “Oh Diddy you make a lot sense”? He’s crying cause there’s no crackheads in Alaska, or because there’s no black people in Alaska????

Come on dude, if you’re gonna say something then at least have some facts. There are a plethora of things to say and you didn’t hit one of them, except you know there’s something going on with Alaska.  How about her being in favor of Alaska seceding. Or all the earmarks she claimed not to be apart of… or troopergate… accusing her ex bro in law of tasering her nephew 3 years after the fact only because of a custody battle. 

I’m just guessing here but the only thing I gather from this is he doesn’t like Sarah Palin because there’s no crackheads and/or black people in Alaska.

I’m willing to bet there’s no one as stupid at Sean “Diddy” Combs in Alaska. Diddy, you’re dumbass.

Someone please help me understand what I’ve just seen.

Sarah Palin in a bikini with a gun. Probably a fake but still funny.

Sarah Palin wearing a bikini

I should have looked this up before submitting it to Digg but the photo above is indeed a fake. I was hoping it wasn’t but deep inside knew that it was. Here’s the original.

Not Sarah Palin Holding A Gun

This is a video of Polar bears and Huskies interacting in a friendly way with each other. First of I wanted to post this video because I love animals and thought this was “cute”. Then I remembered my “Global Warming is destroying the ice caps” friend and that she told me the Polar bears were being starved to death and forced to eat garbage.

If (these) Polar Bears were so hungry wouldn’t they eat these dogs? In the video you can see just how easy it would be for them to do so. mmmmm these bears are huuuuungry.

I got this idea from this a post about getting hits using the keywords for naked pics of Sarah Palin.

After seeing the pic of her daughter I thought it’d be better to see naked pics of Bristol Palin, but then I realized she’s only 17 and that can get me jail time. I’m not very  interested in that.

So this experiment is to see how many of you perverted individuals are looking for naked pictures of Bristol Palin. If you found naked pics of Bristol Palin are you really willing to go to jail for downloading them?

Bristol

Palin

topless

bikini

nude

naked

photo

pictures

video

Think that’s enough search terms to include in the post?  Just to be safe - we better include them in the tags also……..

Too redeem yourself click an ad on my site

One thing I’ve noticed since the “poker boom” has come into place is so many players in cash games and tournaments are quick to push all in. TV has made many poker tournaments and even cash games a total donkfest with so many all in moves. Hopefully this article below from one of the best and most highly respected poker players in the world will enlighten those that watch too much television.

Got this from a poker site that I hate but since I am stealing it from them I suppose I must give them credit. Article from Full Tilt Poker.

Early Tournament Strategies by Allen Cunningham

Many players’ first exposure to poker comes from watching WSOP and WPT tournaments on TV, and I think that’s great. It’s entertaining and you’ll see some interesting plays, but viewers have to understand that they shouldn’t model their games based on the action they see on TV.

Why? The answer is simple - what you’re seeing is unrealistic and edited for television. Players in these televised tournaments often start with very deep stacks (sometimes 10,000 chips or more) and, most of the time, all you’ll see on the broadcast is action from the final table where the blinds are high and play is fast. In contrast, the majority of the low buy-in ($1 to $20) tournaments you’ll encounter online usually start with stacks of 1,500 and blinds of 10/20.

Because your approach to the early stages of these tournaments is key to whether you’ll make the final table, the question is, what should your strategy be?

I suggest adopting a simple approach, especially if you’re not a very experienced tournament player. Try not to play too many hands and aim to see a few cheap flops with small/medium pairs if possible because these can provide some the best chances for you to double or even triple up during the first couple of levels. There are many times when you may be able to put in 5% of your stack or less to see a flop and try and hit your set. You’re 7-to-1 to flop a set, but you may be getting 20-to-1 implied odds early on since a flopped set will often be the best hand, and you’ll have a good chance to double up against weaker players who may overplay top pair.

If you are expecting a few callers, you might want to limp with these hands pre-flop. You may also just want to flat call with these hands if there are already a couple of people in for a small raise when the action gets to you. But, if the action is folded to you in late position, you definitely want to raise and take down the blinds. If you want to play conservatively, you can safely throw away small pairs in early position. As I said previously, you don’t want to commit more than about 5% of your stack pre-flop with small and medium pairs (maybe 6% or 7% max), and when you play from early position there’s no guarantee that’s going to happen.

Of course you also want to be playing your monsters like AA and KK, and other hands like QQ, JJ, AK and AQ. Remember early on when stacks are deep, you’re not going to get a lot of action for all of your chips unless you’re up against a pretty strong hand.

There are no concrete rules as to how fast you should try to build your stack in the early going, but the main thing you don’t want to do is go broke by playing too loose. In smaller online tourneys you will either be in the money or close to the money without having to win too many pots if you can just play tight and hang around for a couple of hours. If you speculate too much or take too many coin-flips when you don’t need to early on, chances are that you’ll end up on the rail and miss that opportunity.

Even if you make it to the fourth or fifth level with just a little above starting stack, you’ll usually be in good enough shape to take a run at the money. Remember, getting into the money and beyond is what counts - so learn how to start your tournaments the right way and give yourself the best chance to be the last player standing at the end.