HomeRoast Digest


Topic: Even more OT: Global climate prediction from 1974, was +OT: Earth's temps... (31 msgs / 1030 lines)
1) From: Scot Murphy
--Apple-Mail-8--607947966
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset-ASCII;
	format=flowed;
	delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Dec 28, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Frank Parth wrote:
<Snip>
Are they named? Are there references? Quotes? Is there anything other  
than a gloss of the issue?
Scot "they should mention sources, being journalists" Murphy
---
"If America has a civic religion, the First Amendment is its central  
article of faith."
	--Henry Louis Gates, Jr.
--Apple-Mail-8--607947966
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Dec 28, 2007, =
at 4:32 PM, Frank Parth wrote:
I have a copy of an article = from the June 24, 1974 edition of Time magazine. In that article, the = best climate scientists in the world came to the conclusion, based on = years of evidence, that the world is facing another ice = age. Are they = named? Are there references? Quotes? Is there anything other than a = gloss of the issue?

Scot "they should mention = sources, being journalists" Murphy
---"If America = has a civic religion, the First Amendment is its central article of = faith." --Henry Louis Gates, = Jr.
= = --Apple-Mail-8--607947966--

2) From: Brett Mason
Unless it was a formal copy delivered straight to Scott, it is suspect...
Try Google?
Brett
On 12/28/07, Scot Murphy  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

3) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 28, 2007, at 9:06 PM, Brett Mason wrote:
<Snip>
So skepticism is only warranted for issues in which you do not wish to  
believe?
Forgive me for not trusting a magazine in the popular press from 33  
years ago, rather than a scientific journal. As you'll no doubt have  
discovered by now, I did in fact go to Google and found a refutation  
of the "ice age myth." I'll await your concession that you will no  
longer consider using it in future discussions.
Scot "in the meantime, I'll build a house...or ten" Murphy
--
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to  
pause and reflect."
	--Mark Twain

4) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 28, 2007, at 9:32 PM, Aaron Scholten wrote:
<Snip>
Please stop being ridiculous. I emit CO2. So do you. So do cows,  
frogs, wildebeests, and even Republicans. The question is whether it  
is significant and a contributing factor to global warming. As it  
turns out, cows are: the worldwide explosion of beef consumption in  
the last half-century has brought an increase in cattle ranching that  
is contributing significantly to methane production. I doubt that  
coffee roasting contributes as significant an amount of CO2 as, say,  
coal burning or vehicle emissions.
What we need is a massive initiative that, in its scope, will shame  
the Apollo project, bringing zero-emission vehicles to reality and  
exclusive use. Humanity needs to abandon the internal combustion  
engine and soon. Unfortunately, as long as the strings in Washington  
are pulled by Big Energy and Big Auto, that won't happen, and this  
generation doesn't have the leaders or wisdom to elect them.
Scot "whoops! apocalypse!" Murphy
---
"Here's a guy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple."
	--Ann Richards, on GW Bush

5) From: Scott Miller
On Dec 28, 2007 10:21 PM, Jeff Anderson  wrote:
<Snip>
You mean ... like this thread?
On a coffee related note, I broke the chamber for my Bodum FP today while
cleaning it... now THAT'S far more important than silly issues like Climate
Change/Global Warming/Oil Exploration/whatever ... Do you realize I'm now
down to something like only 8 ways to brew coffee in my house without my FP
... this is disastrous
sfm

6) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 28, 2007, at 10:05 PM, Aaron Scholten wrote:
<Snip>
I have no patience for willful ignorance. If you can't understand that  
all the coffee roasting in the world is just a drop in the bucket of  
CO2 emissions compared to the constant, global use of combustion  
engines (most of them environmentally unregulated), then you simply  
wish to remain ignorant, and not all of the education in the world is  
going to change your mind. Put simply, reason takes a backseat to your  
politics, and your decisions and rhetoric arise from that and that  
alone.
Scot "better a hypocrite with good intentions than an honest asshole"  
Murphy
---
"Tolerance only grows when faith loses certainty; certainty is  
murderous."
	--Will Durant

7) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 28, 2007, at 11:00 PM, John Brown wrote:
<Snip>
I think you don't understand: if we don't act for the greatest good  
for all mankind right now, there will be very few individuals around  
to exercise those rights. Get it? Your right to drive a car with a gas- 
burning engine does not trump some islander's right to LIVE.
Scot "is there something about the right wing that eradicates ALL  
reason?" Murphy
--
"Compassion is the chief law of human existence."
	--Fyodor Dostoevsky

8) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 28, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Aaron Scholten wrote:
<Snip>
Believe what you want. You're going to anyway.
Scot "whether it be true and factual or right-wing propaganda" Murphy
--
"Every society honors its live conformists and its dead troublemakers."
	--Mignon McLaughlin

9) From: Scott Miller
No shakes, but I consumed far less coffee today than was wise.
We sampled a bunch of new teas at the shop today. Tasty, wonderful stuff,
but white teas don't have much caffeine in them.
Oh, it's definitely going to be a Chemex morning; I have some SM French
Roast Blend ready to go. Have not done a dark roasted brew i some time ...
stash reduction is in full swing here.
cheers,
Scott
On Dec 28, 2007 11:05 PM, Jeff Anderson  wrote:
<Snip>

10) From: Larry English
This entire thread is a fine example - OK, a horrid example - of
self-serving cherry-picked quotes.  Nothing new, nothing definitive, all
from people who've already taken a position and merely wish to blow smoke.
This is just not the place for this stuff - it's not relevant to the goals
and intent of this list.  OT doesn't say it strongly enough - it just
doesn't belong here.  Of course, I could be wrong ...
Larry
On Dec 28, 2007 8:13 PM, John Despres 
wrote:
<Snip>

11) From: Brett Mason
Based on what for gosh sakes?
Remember, the polar bears who will die out first - once the ice melts
down to where the vegetation is currently frozen, which proves that
did not retire the polar bears, which then shows the fallacy of the
receding frozen icecaps argument.
I for one am against volcanic eruptions, which cause more =stuff= in
the =atmosphere=, than all the internal combustion engines ever
made...  Oppose Volcanoes.  (Send $25 and we will send you a bumper
sticker.  Send more and I might win a No-Bell prize)
Oh yeah, just the facts...
Please send a pound of coffee and join "Coffee Roasters Against Bovine
Flatulance"
  Contact me offlist for a destination address.
We can world our change....
Back to coffee folks!
Brett
On 12/28/07, Scot Murphy  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

12) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 29, 2007, at 12:54 AM, Jeff Anderson wrote:
<Snip>
That's okay. I'm sure it's Bill Clinton's fault.
Scot "isn't everything?" Murphy
---
"People say that if you play Microsoft CD's backwards, you hear  
satanic things. But that's nothing, because if you play one forwards  
it installs Windows."
	-Anonymous

13) From: Floyd Lozano
I am pretty sure it was so the US could achieve economic independence from
Texas.
-F
There's a few ways to look at this debate, if one could call it that.  Every
little bit counts is one way - do whatever it takes to reduce your carbon
footprint.  It's not an easy solution, since we don't know how the system is
supposed to be set up.  Nature moves relatively slowly, so you don't see big
swings in CO2 emmissions, all things considered, without major catastrophic
events.  Progress and technology has changed all that.  We can effect large
scale change on a planetary basis within 10 generations, which is posited to
be much less time than the world has been around.  The system is affected so
wildly that equilibrium is lost, or might be lost, and we might not know how
to right the ship.  It's clear nobody wants to go  back and live without
their creature comforts.  It will never happen.  People want their MTV.
Their hot coffee.  Their bigass SUV to carry their 3 kids and a dog down to
the beach.  Whatever.  People are basically selfish at heart - they want
what they want for themselves and their kin.  Much like any cluster of
animals, or viruses, or whatever, wants.   The eventual solution will not be
to right the ship and bring the planet into equilibrium through behavioral
change.  It will be a technical solution.  Either a way will be found to
clean up the planet or reduce the emission of CO2, or the system will be
made bigger - we'll settle other planets or moons or asteroids or whatever.
While I tend to sway towards the alarmist camp because i want a bright
future for the little 2.5 year old girl that looks up at me with those big
brown eyes every day, I think the solution will be slow in coming, if at
all.  Be you evolutionist or creationist, humans as we know them have been
around for a relatively short time with respect to the age of the cosmos, it
would seem, and the vastness of said existence will likely not miss us any
more should we leave it any more than we miss the billion germs we wipe out
every time we wash our hands.  In fact, our extinction will probably bring
that equilibrium we desire so much around very quickly.  Nature has a way of
righting the ship, despite our wishes =)
Enjoy that coffee, keep the problems of humanity in mind, treat one another
with kindness and respect for the rest of your limited days, and life will
probably turn out pretty good for you and yours.
On Dec 29, 2007 1:26 AM, Rich  wrote:
<Snip>

14) From: Brett Mason
John -
Thank you for standing in harms way for all of us.  The courageous
have always stood up to defend and protect, and at times to make war
as required.  The rest of us are the great recipients of freedoms and
choice, and your actions make all this possible...
Brett
On 12/29/07, John Brown  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

15) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 29, 2007, at 2:56 AM, John Brown wrote:
<Snip>
Sincere thanks for your service. You'd be surprised how many liberals  =
are grateful for "rough men" who will do the things they are unable to.
<Snip>
<Snip>
<Snip>
Profit should not be the only motive here. The "free market" is an  
illusion, an elusive and never-reachable goal that some think is the  
magic cure for the world's ills. There has never been a free market,  
and as long as one businessman is too greedy to play by the rules,  
there never will be one. The world needs to realize that a limited  
amount of socialism is not only good, but necessary for the good of  
the market. Say what you will, but a lot of technological advancement  =
has come out of socialistic initiatives. Of course, pure socialism is  =
its own path to failure. No attempt to follow a strict ideology will  
succeed. The wisdom is in learning and adapting to new situations.
<Snip>
<Snip>
<Snip>
I used to ride my bike the 9 miles each way to work, plus I walked  
everywhere else. Injuries and the weight gain they brought on put an  
end to that. I didn't even have a car through most of the 90s.
<Snip>
<Snip>
<Snip>
That's a false dichotomy. People will always die in accidents. You  
don't choose to be in a fatal accident (which is why it's called an  
accident). Sending people to war is a choice, though, and even one  
soldier dying for someone's greed is wrong. I know, I know, millions  
of soldiers since time immemorial have died for greed. That doesn't  
make it right. We are intelligent, sentient beings with conscience.  
Surely we have advanced enough that we can choose not to make war.
<Snip>
I had a class a few weeks ago (I'm a sub) that would have made you  
proud. I filled in for a social studies teacher and we were supposed  
to discuss the pros and cons of affirmative action. The teacher is  
apparently one of those ideologues who pretend to hear the students'  
disagreements...and then tells them they're wrong. (He's a lefty.) I  
view my mission as a teacher as traching the kids *how* to think, not  =
*what* to think. So during the discussion, I played devil's advocate  
to whatever position they took, left or right. In the class, I taught  =
them my particular theory of politics: that political thought is a  
circle, not a spectrum. (Actually, this isn't mine, but one developed  =
by an old friend with some input from me.) On the east put "liberal"  
and the west put "conservative." Then on the north put "moderate" and  =
the south put "extremist." The idea is that left and right can meet at  =
extremism just as at moderation.
<Snip>
In my 46 years, it has been the opposite. I think that our  
expectations color our judgements.
<Snip>
I don't think anyone here was trying, in any way, to denigrate the  
armed forces. Because they are, like every other man-made institution,  =
composed of and controlled by humans, they are flawed, but no one here  =
questions the sacrifice of our soldiers. Not just in terms of harm and  =
loss, but in the loss of creature comforts, in the instability of  
location, all of that. A soldier's, and a soldier's family's, life is  =
not an easy one, even in times of peace. I think even most liberals  
understand that. What makes me angry is the neo-conservative wing that  =
takes it for granted and sacrifices those lives with the insulting  
rationale of "They chose this life, they have to deal with it."
I picked up a hitchhiker once. Older man, well-groomed, wearing a cap  =
from his service (I forget which force) and some of his medals. He was  =
a Viet Nam vet, and he told me about his life since then. I became  
angry. I thought, here's a country that asked all of you, that ran  
your life with the presumption that you might die for it, and it  
doesn't have the decency to provide you with a home when you're  
homeless, or health care when you're sick? As angry as I am about  
conservative politics, I am more angry about a government that forgets  =
its soldiers as soon as they have completed their missions. This  
government asks a lot of its men and women in uniform, and owes them  
much when their time is done.
Scot "my $0.02" Murphy
---
"And if you somehow think Habeas Corpus has not been suspended for  
American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If  
you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or  =
an undocumented immigrant or an 'unlawful enemy combatant'  exactly  =
how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to  
prove you are not? Do you think this Attorney General is going to help  =
you?"
	--Keith Olbermann, 10-18-06

16) From: Ross
Scot,
We all appreciate "good intentions"  especially when they come from people 
who (every few years) see a crisis that demands that we let them remodel our 
house at our expense.  I like the second quote but I prefer the honest 
asshole every time.
Ross
<Snip>

17) From: Ross
Brett,
We need to change our way of life right now to avoid Volcanic Eruptions, 
send me money and elect me to a position of power and I will tell you what 
you need to do, it will be painful but look at the alternative in the 
decision matrix.
Ross

18) From: Ross
Sorry Brett,
It was your idea first so you get the Gulfstream IV, I will be your deputy 
and have to have the Gulfsream III. 
Ross

19) From: Tom Martin
Sorry to chime in here.....
The US is the only country where global warming is considered a myth or that
it still needs study. 
But carry on. It's fun to watch everyone get all frothy at the mouth. 
Who's been roasting this wet Oakland day? 
Tom Martin

20) From: MSMB
I agree that this is an imperative.  In my mind there are two issues that we
simply must deal with today; global warming and nuclear proliferation.  May
I suggest that you check out the web page of the Union of Concerned
Scientists:"http://www.ucsusa.org.

21) From: Justin Marquez
Awww... `Just plant a few trees... it works for Al Gore so his monster house
can be "green" and his private jet doesn't "count".
Safe Journeys and Sweet Music
Justin Marquez (CYPRESS, TX)
On Dec 28, 2007 11:05 PM, Brett Mason  wrote:
<Snip>

22) From: Floyd Lozano
I think 2 more important issues than nukes and temperatures are education
and hunger.  Possibly disease ranks in there somewhere.  Just think of all
the kids out there without a full belly that have to worry about survival,
not learning and thinking, and how the face of the world might change if
they knew more about it.  A brilliance greater than Einstein, Feynman, or
whoever else might be out there not reaching its full potential simply
because it's not afforded the chance to survive, much less thrive.  One
might argue this education might simply lead to a quicker proliferation of
nuclear material and greenhouse gas belching homes and factories.  It's a
tough call.  It sure would be nice if less time was spent crafting invective
and rationalizations for one point of view or another and that effort was
directed to solving real and present problems, whatever they be.  I
certainly wish I was wise and intelligent enough to have a solution to any
of it.  I doubt such solution will come form the back and forth on this list
or any other list on which it's been discussed.  Who knows, it might
actually be productive and spark the beginnings of a solution in someone's
mind, or someone's childs mind.
We should instead focus on the Patriots, who have just scored what may be
the game winning TD!  Go Pats =)
-F
On Dec 29, 2007 10:30 PM, Justin Marquez  wrote:
<Snip>

23) From: an iconoclast
On Dec 29, 2007 7:30 PM, Justin Marquez  wrote:
<Snip>
finding it an excuse to ignore the fact we are swimming in our own
excrement, I just urge everyone to look at what they can change. I recycle,
compost, I try to buy locally, I try to decrease meat consumption,
unnecessary trips, plant more native plants, use less chemicals, buy in
bulk, wash and reuse plastic bags, put on a sweater rather than turning up
the heat, investigate alternative energy, every day look at what I waste and
consume and make a change and then, model this behavior for my grandchildren
who will be most affected by our disregard in the future.
Whether the earth gets colder or warmer is not the issue.  Cleaning up after
ourselves is.
Take care,
Ann
-- 
Sweet Maria's list searchable archiveshttp://themeyers.org/HomeRoast/index.htm

24) From: Robert Avery
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
This sounds a little off topic to me ... but Jeff, reading your info ... =
you need to get a grip!!! The answer is simple ... make sure when you =
vote for people that you vote for that they have the same philosophy you =
do and convince others to do the same. I don't disagree with many of the =
things you mention, but the people making the decisions for everyone, =
are the ones that get voted in. Just watch CSPAN for a while and you'll =
know why we have the problems we have. For now though ... sit back, get =
a strong cup of Joe ... and relax ...  have a good Holiday. Later,Bob

25) From: Allon Stern
On Dec 30, 2007, at 7:47 AM, "Robert Avery"  wrote:
<Snip>
You mean "relax, don't worry, have a homeroast," right? :-)
(for those who don't catch the reference, google RDWHAHB)
-
allon

26) From: Robert Avery
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Right on Allon .... Have a good one .... later, Bob

27) From: Brett Mason
Send me your snail mail address so I can contribute to stop Volcanic Eruptions!
B
On Dec 29, 2007 1:51 PM, Ross  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

28) From: Brett Mason
Jeff - I cannot believe you went here...
1. This is a coffee list.  We are horribly bored.  Please get off the
political rant now.
2. I take personal offense.  Please do not challenge the patriotism of
those who preserve our freedom.  You are dead wrong, and your lack of
appreciation is despicable.  Yes, my sons are among those who protect
your right to be rude and offensive.  But demeaning them, and Sean,
Dennis, Gary, and all those who stand in harms way for you and I, is
way out of line.
No, I am not continuing this discussion.  But I certainly am not
willing to pass on your post and somehow give assent to your
misstatements regarding our heroic soldiers.
Brett
On Dec 29, 2007 10:06 AM, Jeff Anderson  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

29) From: Scot Murphy
On Dec 30, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Brett Mason wrote:
<Snip>
May I take a moment to remind you it all began with an exchange  
slamming Al Gore and climate change?
Responsibility. It's for right-wingers, too.
Scot "not to mention who called whose patriotism into question for  
dissenting" Murphy
--
"CORPORATION, n: a device for obtaining individual profit without  
individual responsibility."
	--Ambrose Bierce

30) From: Scott Marquardt
Amazing thread.
On Dec 29, 2007 11:41 PM, Jeff Anderson  wrote:
<Snip>
cheered by a lot of dramatic news of emerging technologies that are likely
to leapfrog our hopeful expectations of just two years ago. There's some
cool stuff coming on-line. Extremely clean and economical deisel engines,
extremely cheap and durable solar material, dramatic energy density
improvements in storage batteries (darned essential to anything else we
improve), and more.
One thing to keep in mind that's utterly apolitical, though, is that this is
not just about "oil." That's frightfully naive. Oil is proxy for "economy."
In any argument where someone impugns a foreign policy posture on the
grounds that it's "just for oil," substitute "economy" for "oil" and you've
effected an instant reductio ad absurdum of a poor argument. It sounds
wonderful (especially among classists) to disparage "big companies," and yet
these are the companies who employ Americans (among others), whose products
generate $30 billion in tax revenue on pump sales alone, whose products are
absolutely essential to manufacturing and transportation of goods in an
economy dependent on competitive production costs and long-distance
transportation (it'd be nice if the latter were not the case, but it is and
that's as much a reality as melting polar ice), and so forth.
I'm no fan of companies that are self-interested to the detriment of our
future (but those don't include all oil companies, either). But it's not
defense of such companies to counter the idea that we can be cavalier about
oil. As Bush said, we're addicted to it. My wife works in a methadone
clinic, so I'm acquainted with an implication of the metaphor -- it takes
time and careful planning and profound change to turn things around.
My 2.
- Scott

31) From: Lynne
Len -
Very cool! Many people don't realize the savings that are available with our
local power
companies.
My parents taught me (they passed away many years ago) to conserve. They
grew up in
the Depression, and knew a bit about suffering. Even though my dad was
accomplished,
and they didn't have to worry about much of anything, they always knew that
it was still
possible to lose it all.
I used to think it was a base-less fear.
And then I got older...
Lynne
On Jan 1, 2008 4:46 PM, CoffeeRoastersClub 
wrote:
<Snip>


HomeRoast Digest