Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:51:51 GMT From: still me <wheeledBobnospamo.com> Subject: Re: Octane ratings.....what's the truth?
On 18 Apr 2007 11:46:15 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospaml.com> wrote: >> On the other hand, you could go read some >> research without the expectation of a pre-defined outcome, and see >> what it seems to be saying. > >Got pointers? Start with Google and "global warming". That should get you rolling. >The point you're trying to make, and the point he's trying to make, are >the same. He seems to have said it better. It's not about "rising >above the top of the glass" (you can do that with floatation), it's >about the ice that's sitting on something solid rather than floating. I >also question your volumetrics but that's another problem. No, they're not. His (and your agreement) were some kind of childish suggestion that we're only dealing with "floating ice cubes". Oh, no, wait, call scientists around the world! John on the usenet just figured out that melting ice caps can't raise ocean levels based on a simple experiment in a glass! They'll all be mighty embarrassed they didn't figure this out for themselves. >So...I'm not him, he's not me, but I'm still interested in unbiased >research on this topic that I can read. And I'm still not getting any >pointers. So I'm still treating the same as the "coming ice age" hype >of the 1970s. What happened in the 70's is irrelevant. Nearly all climate scientists agree on what's happening (with the notable exception except those being bludgeoned by the Bush administration to temper their writings on the subject). Either go do some reading or just continue to act like an ideologue - your choice.