Discussion:
What Did You Watch? 2017-08-02 (Wednesday)
(too old to reply)
shawn
2017-08-03 06:55:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
SALVATION:

I'm sorry but I have to start out with the snark. We have a probe
above Jupiter that seems to be stable but out of NASA's control. NASA
finally regains control of the probe and start a rocket burn to move
it into the desired position. That movement is supposedly enough to
cause the rocket to FALL into the gravitational well of Jupiter (even
though it was stable before and the rocket thrust was to move it
further away from Jupiter.) How does that happen? Magic science.


There's not much else to say..

The only other show I watched was BIG BROTHER where the drama got
amped up to 11 after the outcome of the nominations for eviction.
Arthur Lipscomb
2017-08-03 13:56:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
I'm sorry but I have to start out with the snark. We have a probe
above Jupiter that seems to be stable but out of NASA's control. NASA
finally regains control of the probe and start a rocket burn to move
it into the desired position. That movement is supposedly enough to
cause the rocket to FALL into the gravitational well of Jupiter (even
though it was stable before and the rocket thrust was to move it
further away from Jupiter.) How does that happen? Magic science.
There's not much else to say..
I watched both episodes. The show is pretty bad. I didn't pay much
attention to the second episode.
Post by shawn
The only other show I watched was BIG BROTHER where the drama got
amped up to 11 after the outcome of the nominations for eviction.
Yeah, and I'm not at all clear what those fools were fighting over.


This will be a multi-day catch-up. I watched:


Somewhere Between - "The Hunter and the Hunted" - It's only episode 3
but they appear to have already caught the serial killer. Nevertheless
there is clearly a lot more going on. I'm really not liking any of the
characters but I'm sticking with this.


Animal Kingdom - "Custody" - The boys plan their next job(s). While
Smurf offers to launder their money. Although I suspect for some of the
money stolen, she won't be asked to launder.


Preacher - "Pig" - OK episode but I can't begin to even try and recap it.


The Circle (Netflix rental) - Emma Watson stars as a young woman who
goes to work for "The Circle," a tech company run by Tom Hanks that
specializes in uniting various aspects of people's lives into one
seamless operation. This movie was throwing off major vibes that it was
basically a remake of the Ryan Phillippe / Tim Robbins movie
"Antitrust." I kept waiting for Hanks to start killing people or at
least break a law or two. The Circle was clearly a bad company with way
too much power which they definitely abused, but that they were never
overtly evil. The movie was in desperate need of a bad guy who was
actively doing bad things. Unfortunately Hanks never came close to
pulling that off. Overall the movie was just boring.


Absolutely Anything (Netflix rental) - Terry Jones directs Simon Pegg in
this remake of "The Man Who Could Work Miracles." Instead of gods, it's
aliens (voiced by Python alum Michael Palin, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam,
John Cleese, and Eric Idle) that give Pegg his powers. Kate Beckinsale
also stars as a neighbor Pegg lusts after and Robin Williams voices
Pegg's dog who can talk after Pegg wishes for it. Just by saying what
he wants and flicking his wrist Pegg can make anything happen. Pegg
often has trouble properly wording his wishes which can cause unexpected
and unwanted results. Based on the reviews I was expecting the worse
but was very pleasantly surprised. I'll admit many of the jokes fall
flat but it's still an interesting premise and Pegg caries the movie
well enough. Even when not funny it's still interesting watching Pegg
make his wishes and how they play out.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-03 14:20:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Absolutely Anything (Netflix rental) - Terry Jones directs Simon Pegg in
this remake of "The Man Who Could Work Miracles." Instead of gods, it's
aliens (voiced by Python alum Michael Palin, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam,
John Cleese, and Eric Idle) that give Pegg his powers. Kate Beckinsale
also stars as a neighbor Pegg lusts after and Robin Williams voices
Pegg's dog who can talk after Pegg wishes for it. Just by saying what
he wants and flicking his wrist Pegg can make anything happen. Pegg
often has trouble properly wording his wishes which can cause unexpected
and unwanted results. Based on the reviews I was expecting the worse
but was very pleasantly surprised. I'll admit many of the jokes fall
flat but it's still an interesting premise and Pegg caries the movie
well enough. Even when not funny it's still interesting watching Pegg
make his wishes and how they play out.
Alas, not available streaming.

The Netflix tried to get me to watch VAN HELSING (the recent Syfy
series) and THE MATRIX. Gah to both.

I watched eps 1 & 2 of the 4 part QUARTERMASS CONCLUSION from 1979
starring Manimal McCorkindale. This was apparently made simultaneously
both as a miniseries and a movie, same plot, same writer, same cast but
... different scripts. When I'm done with the mine I'll at least peek
at the 'movie' to see what's the what. If I'm not Quartermassed out at
that point, I've also got the 2005 version on hand.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-03 15:43:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
The Circle (Netflix rental) - Emma Watson stars as a young woman who
goes to work for "The Circle," a tech company run by Tom Hanks that
specializes in uniting various aspects of people's lives into one
seamless operation. This movie was throwing off major vibes that it was
basically a remake of the Ryan Phillippe / Tim Robbins movie
"Antitrust." I kept waiting for Hanks to start killing people or at
least break a law or two. The Circle was clearly a bad company with way
too much power which they definitely abused, but that they were never
overtly evil. The movie was in desperate need of a bad guy who was
actively doing bad things. Unfortunately Hanks never came close to
pulling that off. Overall the movie was just boring.
The book was ultimately disappointing, but I still plan to watch the
movie at some point despite all indications that it will not be a
spectacular experience.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Ian J. Ball
2017-08-03 16:38:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[snip]
[You didn't *ASK*... >:/ :p ]
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...

Two-day catch-up here:

Daytime Divas (recorded 2-hour season(?) finale) - "Whose Show Is It
Anyway?" and "Lunch Is on Us". I'm not going to go into huge detail
here. The season "mystery" played out exactly like anyone who has seen
"Desparate Housewives", etc. would expect it to play out. And they
resolved the Kibby storyline (with Rob Estes) satisfactorily, as well
as the Mo storyline (basically, Mo and Maxine bury the hatchet). I did
not care for the very unresolved "ending" though - if this show never
gets another episode, this is not the way to go out... And, OTOH, if
this show is renewed, this "cliffhanger" can probably be resolved
fairly easily.

Stitchers (recorded) - "Dreamland". Covered by others. So they're going
to try to pin all the EVOL!!1! stuff that's happened lately on sister
Ivy? She doesn't really seem EVOL! enough for that...

Shooter (recorded) - "Don't Mess With Texas". We get more background on
how the events in Afghanistan led to the present day circumstances.
Meanwhile, Isaac Johnson links up with Bob Lee, who seemingly wants
nothing to do with Johnson, but later they all determine that Solotov
is involved in their current predicament. Meanwhile, Patricia Gregson
(Beverly D'Angelo) slaps down Memphis. And, in the end, Solotov gets to
another of Bob Lee's old squadmates.

Mako Mermaids (The Netflix) - Episodes #3.5-3.8. The first two of these
tended to be "funny" episodes, and weren't all that great, though Evie
uncontrollably levitating Ondina (and later Weilan) in "New Beginnings"
was amusing. The last two episodes pivoted back to the "water dragon"
storyline - in the end, Zac's attempts to use magic on the dragon fail,
and the end result is that the dragon "zaps" Evie back to "humandom"
(which she's unexpectedly crushed about - back in season #2 all she
wanted to do was stop being a mermaid!....) in "The Way of the Dragon".

Longmire (The Netflix) - "Pure Peckinpah" and "Objection", eps #5.5 &
5.6. In these episodes, Walt and co. discover that the Boston Irish Mob
are responsible for the surge in heroin and prostitution in the county.
In the first of these, "Pure Peckinpah", Walt begins to suspect that
Mathias(!) is "Hector", and Henry and Mathias come up with a pretty
ingenious plan to throw Walt of that line of thinking. Meanwhile, we
see how EVOL!!1! Malachi really is in this one. And this one ends with
Ferg seeming like a goner.
In "Objection", Ferg is recovered alive, and Walt has to deal with
the deposition for the civil suit and an unhappy FBI (personified by
Noam Jenkins, again), while at the same time he suspects that Jacob
Nighthorse is in cahoots with the Irish mob (which he isn't - but Jacob
knows that Malachi is...). Meanwhile, crazy Mandy (Tamara Duarte) drags
Cady into her craziness. The final scene of this episode, in which Walt
confronts Shane Muldoon (Dylan Walsh) in Boston was worth the price of
admission.

The Worst Witch (The Netflix) - Episodes #4-7. They introduce a new
student, Enid Nightshade, as a friend for Mildred. In "Pond Life", they
get back to the amniotronic(?) frogs in a big way, so I was inclined to
like this episode... ;) It ended with teacher Miss Gullet being
exposed as a "baddie".
In ep. #6, "The Grand Wizard" (played by Tim Curry in the 1986 TV
film) shows up, and is on the warpath after somebody anonymously sends
him a letter about Mildred's various disasters at the school - and it
turns out there's even more to it. In "The Best Teacher", another of
Mildred's potions goes awry, turning her "old", so she has to pretend
to be a substitute teacher... This episode ends with Mildred coming to
a surprising revelation - maybe her "non magical" Mom is secretly a
witch afterall!

Clinical (The Netflix) - This was pretty good. It is rare that
horror-type movie can keep me guessing these days, but I couldn't
figure out where this was going through its ending (which is a *good*
thing!). I won't give too much away, but this was stars Vinessa Shaw as
a psychiatrist, with Kevin Rahm and India Eisley as two of her
patients... I'm not sure if this was really "horror", as much as it was
"suspense", though there are definitely a few "gory" patches...


Recorded for later: The Bold Type, Salvation, The Sinner (series
premiere), Blood Drive(!), and a couple of episodes of "Lego Star Wars:
The Freemaker Adventrues"...
--
"His compassion killed him." - Dr. Sabine Lommers, in
"A Kingdom Divided Against Itself" (ep. #9), "Containment" (06-21-2016)
anim8rfsk
2017-08-03 16:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian J. Ball
The Worst Witch (The Netflix) - Episodes #4-7. They introduce a new
student, Enid Nightshade, as a friend for Mildred. In "Pond Life", they
get back to the amniotronic(?) frogs in a big way, so I was inclined to
like this episode... ;) It ended with teacher Miss Gullet being
exposed as a "baddie".
In ep. #6, "The Grand Wizard" (played by Tim Curry in the 1986 TV
film) shows up, and is on the warpath after somebody anonymously sends
him a letter about Mildred's various disasters at the school - and it
turns out there's even more to it. In "The Best Teacher", another of
Mildred's potions goes awry, turning her "old", so she has to pretend
to be a substitute teacher... This episode ends with Mildred coming to
a surprising revelation - maybe her "non magical" Mom is secretly a
witch afterall!
How does this compare to the previous series?
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ian J. Ball
2017-08-03 17:32:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Ian J. Ball
The Worst Witch (The Netflix) - Episodes #4-7. They introduce a new
student, Enid Nightshade, as a friend for Mildred. In "Pond Life", they
get back to the amniotronic(?) frogs in a big way, so I was inclined to
like this episode... ;) It ended with teacher Miss Gullet being
exposed as a "baddie".
In ep. #6, "The Grand Wizard" (played by Tim Curry in the 1986 TV
film) shows up, and is on the warpath after somebody anonymously sends
him a letter about Mildred's various disasters at the school - and it
turns out there's even more to it. In "The Best Teacher", another of
Mildred's potions goes awry, turning her "old", so she has to pretend
to be a substitute teacher... This episode ends with Mildred coming to
a surprising revelation - maybe her "non magical" Mom is secretly a
witch afterall!
How does this compare to the previous series?
I'm likely to try to finish this one out before attempting the previous versions... Probably will get to those next week, then.
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-03 18:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian J. Ball
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
Why does it seem like every day you do a two-day catch up?

:P
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
icebreaker
2017-08-03 19:35:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:39:22 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ian J. Ball
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
Why does it seem like every day you do a two-day catch up?
:P
I think he's now only 140 days behind with all the 2-days!
anim8rfsk
2017-08-03 20:33:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ian J. Ball
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
Why does it seem like every day you do a two-day catch up?
:P
Because every day Robin does a two day preview.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-03 23:42:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ian J. Ball
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
Why does it seem like every day you do a two-day catch up?
:P
Because every day Robin does a two day preview.
Those are giving me deja vu.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-04 00:12:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Ian J. Ball
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
Why does it seem like every day you do a two-day catch up?
:P
Because every day Robin does a two day preview.
Those are giving me deja vu.
Over and over and over again.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Arthur Lipscomb
2017-08-04 01:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian J. Ball
[snip]
[You didn't *ASK*... >:/ :p ]
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
snip
Post by Ian J. Ball
The Worst Witch (The Netflix) - Episodes #4-7. They introduce a new
student, Enid Nightshade, as a friend for Mildred. In "Pond Life", they
get back to the amniotronic(?) frogs in a big way, so I was inclined to
like this episode... ;)
Seriously? They looked really fake in the pilot.

It ended with teacher Miss Gullet being
Post by Ian J. Ball
exposed as a "baddie".
In ep. #6, "The Grand Wizard" (played by Tim Curry in the 1986 TV
film) shows up, and is on the warpath after somebody anonymously sends
him a letter about Mildred's various disasters at the school - and it
turns out there's even more to it. In "The Best Teacher", another of
Mildred's potions goes awry, turning her "old", so she has to pretend to
be a substitute teacher... This episode ends with Mildred coming to a
surprising revelation - maybe her "non magical" Mom is secretly a witch
afterall!
I'm tempted to stick with this just so I can make it to episode 6 and
see how they handle the Grand Wizard.
Post by Ian J. Ball
Clinical (The Netflix) - This was pretty good. It is rare that
horror-type movie can keep me guessing these days, but I couldn't figure
out where this was going through its ending (which is a *good* thing!).
I won't give too much away, but this was stars Vinessa Shaw as a
psychiatrist, with Kevin Rahm and India Eisley as two of her patients...
I'm not sure if this was really "horror", as much as it was "suspense",
though there are definitely a few "gory" patches...
No recognizable names and Netflix thinks I won't like it. I think I'll
skip this. But if you've never seen it before I highly recommend the
Jude Law thriller "Side Effects." He plays a psychiatrist and it will
keep you in suspense throughout.
Ian J. Ball
2017-08-04 14:51:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Ian J. Ball
[snip]
[You didn't *ASK*... >:/ :p ]
What did *I* watch, you ask? Well, let me tell you!...
snip
Post by Ian J. Ball
The Worst Witch (The Netflix) - Episodes #4-7. They introduce a new
student, Enid Nightshade, as a friend for Mildred. In "Pond Life", they
get back to the amniotronic(?) frogs in a big way, so I was inclined to
like this episode... ;)
Seriously? They looked really fake in the pilot.
I liked them. :)
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Ian J. Ball
It ended with teacher Miss Gullet being
exposed as a "baddie".
In ep. #6, "The Grand Wizard" (played by Tim Curry in the 1986 TV film)
shows up, and is on the warpath after somebody anonymously sends him a
letter about Mildred's various disasters at the school - and it turns
out there's even more to it. In "The Best Teacher", another of
Mildred's potions goes awry, turning her "old", so she has to pretend
to be a substitute teacher... This episode ends with Mildred coming to
a surprising revelation - maybe her "non magical" Mom is secretly a
witch afterall!
I'm tempted to stick with this just so I can make it to episode 6 and
see how they handle the Grand Wizard.
I bet you're going to hate how they went with this...
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Ian J. Ball
Clinical (The Netflix) - This was pretty good. It is rare that
horror-type movie can keep me guessing these days, but I couldn't
figure out where this was going through its ending (which is a *good*
thing!). I won't give too much away, but this was stars Vinessa Shaw as
a psychiatrist, with Kevin Rahm and India Eisley as two of her
patients... I'm not sure if this was really "horror", as much as it was
"suspense", though there are definitely a few "gory" patches...
No recognizable names and Netflix thinks I won't like it. I think I'll
skip this. But if you've never seen it before I highly recommend the
Jude Law thriller "Side Effects." He plays a psychiatrist and it will
keep you in suspense throughout.
It's not on The Netflix... :(
--
"His compassion killed him." - Dr. Sabine Lommers, in
"A Kingdom Divided Against Itself" (ep. #9), "Containment" (06-21-2016)
icebreaker
2017-08-03 19:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Salvation (CBS) -- It's the effing Russkies! That Black woman needs to
be put to death for being such an incompetent. Last time she was
bitching about blowing through a billion dollars. Does that make any
difference or sense when the world is about to end. This time she
won't let Billionaire have access to a double root protected terminal
to locate the stolen EM engine 'cause he doesn't have clearance. Pile
of crap.

Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.

Suits (USA) -- Donna tells Harvey he's blowing it. The law firm from
which Harvey's friend came bring with his clients is going after the
Firm. Harvey goes to Jessica for advice. Rachel's Dad wants to take a
crap in Harvey's toilet as they inspect his loft as a suitable wedding
locale. Mike continues to be involved in the pro bono he handed off to
the Clinic which is going to come back to bite him in the butt.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-03 20:33:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by icebreaker
Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.
But she's hawt!
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ian J. Ball
2017-08-03 21:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by icebreaker
Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.
But she's hawt!
*Is* she?...

:p
--
"His compassion killed him." - Dr. Sabine Lommers, in
"A Kingdom Divided Against Itself" (ep. #9), "Containment" (06-21-2016)
anim8rfsk
2017-08-03 22:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by icebreaker
Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.
But she's hawt!
*Is* she?...
:p
Hotter than that chyck on "State of Affairs"
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ian J. Ball
2017-08-04 00:41:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by icebreaker
Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.
But she's hawt!
*Is* she?...
:p
Hotter than that chyck on "State of Affairs"
Not even close - Heigl, circa. "Under Seige 2" was haught enough to
blow Biel off the planet.

:p
--
"His compassion killed him." - Dr. Sabine Lommers, in
"A Kingdom Divided Against Itself" (ep. #9), "Containment" (06-21-2016)
BTR1701
2017-08-03 23:20:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by icebreaker
Sinner (USA) -- So a housewife repeatedly stabs and kills a dude
publically fooling around with his woman on the beach. No one
including the woman knows why she did it. The detective is not going
quietly into the night and is determined to find the reason, possibly
to clear her. It seems pretty evident to me the woman perceived the
man to be assaulting the girlfriend so she stopped the assault. She
probably has some dark and deeply repressed prior life trauma. Or it's
supernatural or the Russkies. At any rate I don't find this crap
entertaining at all.
But she's hawt!
And she makes great cookies.
Jim G.
2017-08-05 01:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by icebreaker
Salvation (CBS) -- It's the effing Russkies! That Black woman needs to
be put to death for being such an incompetent.
Yes.
Post by icebreaker
Last time she was
bitching about blowing through a billion dollars.
Yes.
Post by icebreaker
Does that make any
difference or sense when the world is about to end.
Exactly.
Post by icebreaker
This time she
won't let Billionaire have access to a double root protected terminal
to locate the stolen EM engine 'cause he doesn't have clearance. Pile
of crap.
Yes. I honestly thought that she had the potential to be a competent
female character worth rooting for. Boy, was I wrong!
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Connor
2017-08-04 16:10:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
I'm sorry but I have to start out with the snark. We have a probe
above Jupiter that seems to be stable but out of NASA's control. NASA
finally regains control of the probe and start a rocket burn to move
it into the desired position. That movement is supposedly enough to
cause the rocket to FALL into the gravitational well of Jupiter (even
though it was stable before and the rocket thrust was to move it
further away from Jupiter.) How does that happen? Magic science.
We don't pay much attention to the science we just go along for the ride. :) we're having fun watching.
Jim G.
2017-08-05 01:11:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
I'm sorry but I have to start out with the snark. We have a probe
above Jupiter that seems to be stable but out of NASA's control. NASA
finally regains control of the probe and start a rocket burn to move
it into the desired position. That movement is supposedly enough to
cause the rocket to FALL into the gravitational well of Jupiter (even
though it was stable before and the rocket thrust was to move it
further away from Jupiter.) How does that happen? Magic science.
There's not much else to say..
I'll say it, then. Because the first outing was especially bad.

First, a repeat offender. As someone (you?) mentioned last week, it
takes more than 30 minutes for light from Jupiter to reach Earth, but we
once again have magic video and orbital instructions that can cover that
distance instantaneously.

And then there's a bunch of air gap-related stuff. For starters, if Elon
Musk Jr. was in that air-gapped facility and it blocked cellphone
signals, then his RFID implant would have been blocked, as well. It
would not have been able to report his location at that time. "R" is for
radio, and all that. Furthermore, and for the same reason, he would not
have been able to send texts from his phone while he was in the
air-gapped facility. So either he wasn't there when the text was sent
(right before the hack) or someone else sent the text. And finally on
that point, I guess Elon hasn't heard of multi-factor authentication
when it comes to accessing his various batcaves, as in RFID chip *and*
retina scan *and* 3D facial mapping verification. Instead, someone gets
his chip and it's full access to everything! Yay! Again, why bother to
have science advisors?

And finally, a couple of liberal arts flaws. First, Harris says at one
point, "He's guilty, Grace. The evidence is not circumstantial." Um, no.
You have a vague text message and a location where multiple people would
have been working. That's pretty much the epitome of "circumstantial."
And second...well, pretty much Jillian's entire speech at the end, which
clearly represented the show's writers projecting BIG TIME. But I'll
focus on the "It is hope and only hope that will save us." Um, no.
Again. Hope can motivate. Hope can inspire. Hope can get you through
dark times. But hope without scientists and engineers to do the heavy
lifting is just false hope. In the current context, hope will not stop
an asteroid.

In the second hour, bad drama dominated over bad science. Claire, the
black gal who I thought had potential -- despite the fact that she
seemed to have been introduced at least in part to provide a soapy
relationship triangle -- instead confirmed that she's just another
unpleasant and horrible person. Stupid priorities, big torture fan even
in the absence of definitive guilt, jealous and bitter shrew. In
addition, Jillian reminded us once again that she's a high-maintenance,
self-absorbed artist type, which goes along with the delusions --
regarding her own importance in the grander scheme of things -- that she
expressed in the first hour.

But all is not lost! Amanda, the reporter, is alive and well and seems
competent. Sure, she does the usual sneaky reporter stuff, but she's not
annoying and horrible and completely unlikable in the process. And
c'mon. They need to give us at least *one* woman to root for on this thing!

Elsewhere, Liam's professor, Croft, is outed as a mole and his
explanation to Liam is that it was all about the EM drive. But when he
"disappeared" earlier on and committed to his treasonous path, he knew
only about the asteroid and was completely ignorant about the status of
Elon Musk Jr.'s EM drive. So either he's lying or the writers are
idiots. Tough call. Anyway, that scene ends with Croft shot and Liam
hiding, but not too well. But the two guards who are steps away from
seeing and capturing Liam again give up because...the plane is leaving?
I guess they didn't think to call someone on the *private* plane to tell
them to, you know, ask the pilot to stop for a minute or two. No,
because that would have made sense and ensured that Liam was caught by
the bad guys and the writers needed him to get safely back to Team Elon.
But they were too incompetent to do it in a way that wasn't stupid.

And lastly, one tech scene. The one where we saw "satellite imagery" of
a kidnapping from an angle that would have required the "satellite" to
be something like 20 feet off the ground. But it got better when a tech
said that the satellite tracked the kidnappers' van for 30 miles before
it went "out of range." Um, how does *that* work? It's a *SATELLITE*.
Supposedly. In orbit. Supposedly. So it should either go "out of range"
much faster than that or it should still be able to follow it well
beyond 30 miles. But then again, while we were watching the nearly
ground-level "satellite" footage of the bad guys' van initially leaving
the kidnapping site, the van went off-camera -- um, I mean
off-"satellite" in about three seconds. I guess satellites are like
drones now. Or something. I have no idea. I just know that the "science
advisors" for this show should feel really guilty about cashing those
checks.

Oh, well. Despite all of this completely avoidable badness, the show is
still better than reality TV or summer reruns of the 123rd season of
NCIS. I try to keep that in mind, but sometimes it's very difficult...
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
BTR1701
2017-08-07 01:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
shawn
2017-08-07 01:45:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 06 Aug 2017 20:36:03 -0500, BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
I'm not sure there are any science advisors. I know people said there
was one attached to the show but I wonder if he was only involved with
the pilot episode to give them a good basis to work with. I noticed
the guys name didn't show up during the credits for the last episode
so it seems like they may not be using anyone as a science advisor
now.
Post by BTR1701
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I get that they will often neglect information that gets in the way of
the story they want to tell. I've got no problem with that. What gets
me is when they are neglecting advice that wouldn't hurt the story or
demand a lot of screen time or money to implement. That is something
I'll never understand. Especially when they've already paid for the
information.
Jim G.
2017-08-07 17:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
On Sun, 06 Aug 2017 20:36:03 -0500, BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
I'm not sure there are any science advisors. I know people said there
was one attached to the show but I wonder if he was only involved with
the pilot episode to give them a good basis to work with. I noticed
the guys name didn't show up during the credits for the last episode
so it seems like they may not be using anyone as a science advisor
now.
The writers know all that they need to know at this point. They're quick
learners. :)
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I get that they will often neglect information that gets in the way of
the story they want to tell. I've got no problem with that. What gets
me is when they are neglecting advice that wouldn't hurt the story or
demand a lot of screen time or money to implement. That is something
I'll never understand. Especially when they've already paid for the
information.
Exactly! The time delay regarding comms with something out by Jupiter,
for example, could have easily been addressed with a few tweaks to the
script and provided a cool learning experience for some viewers at the
same time!
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-07 02:34:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<1601563745.523762114.838974.address_is-***@news.giganews.co
m>,
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
2) checking the credits, you must be:
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
A Friend
2017-08-07 07:48:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
You looked too? Heh heh.

There was a single episode of INTELLIGENCE that had the two leads
pretending to be Secret Service agents. No (apparent) credit for tech
advisor, though. Shucks.
BTR1701
2017-08-07 10:21:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
Post by BTR1701
,
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
Heh. My Mandarin is awesome!

The only bit of my 'advice' that made it on screen was Ory's weapons
techniques. I took her out to our range in the Angeles Forest and gave her
about five hour's worth of weapons handling and shooting instruction. She
was very concerned about looking credible on screen, so she paid attention
and learned fast and well. Pretty good shot, too.

Given the attitude of the producers, I'm surprised they didn't tell her to
stop looking so realistic.

"Meagan, go ahead and put your finger on the trigger while you're clearing
the room. It looks more dramatic that way. And can we get you to rack the
slide on the gun right before you kick in the door, please?"

"But if I rack the slide, that means the gun was unloaded up till that
point, and no cop walks around with an unloaded gun, especially into a
hostile environment like this."

"Meagan, baby, who cares? It's dramatic!"
anim8rfsk
2017-08-07 16:08:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
Post by BTR1701
,
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
Heh. My Mandarin is awesome!
The only bit of my 'advice' that made it on screen was Ory's weapons
techniques. I took her out to our range in the Angeles Forest and gave her
about five hour's worth of weapons handling and shooting instruction. She
was very concerned about looking credible on screen, so she paid attention
and learned fast and well. Pretty good shot, too.
Given the attitude of the producers, I'm surprised they didn't tell her to
stop looking so realistic.
"Meagan, go ahead and put your finger on the trigger while you're clearing
the room. It looks more dramatic that way. And can we get you to rack the
slide on the gun right before you kick in the door, please?"
"But if I rack the slide, that means the gun was unloaded up till that
point, and no cop walks around with an unloaded gun, especially into a
hostile environment like this."
"Meagan, baby, who cares? It's dramatic!"
Did you watch the BLUE BLOODS on this very topic?
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
BTR1701
2017-08-07 18:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by BTR1701
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
Post by BTR1701
,
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
Heh. My Mandarin is awesome!
The only bit of my 'advice' that made it on screen was Ory's weapons
techniques. I took her out to our range in the Angeles Forest and gave her
about five hour's worth of weapons handling and shooting instruction. She
was very concerned about looking credible on screen, so she paid attention
and learned fast and well. Pretty good shot, too.
Given the attitude of the producers, I'm surprised they didn't tell her to
stop looking so realistic.
"Meagan, go ahead and put your finger on the trigger while you're clearing
the room. It looks more dramatic that way. And can we get you to rack the
slide on the gun right before you kick in the door, please?"
"But if I rack the slide, that means the gun was unloaded up till that
point, and no cop walks around with an unloaded gun, especially into a
hostile environment like this."
"Meagan, baby, who cares? It's dramatic!"
Did you watch the BLUE BLOODS on this very topic?
I don't remember that one, no.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-07 19:33:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<1666270695.523823598.085701.address_is-***@news.giganews.co
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by BTR1701
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
Post by BTR1701
,
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
A) So you're saying the series was misnamed?
Christina Briel Chan ... technical advisor: mandarin chinese (1 episode,
2014)
Heh. My Mandarin is awesome!
The only bit of my 'advice' that made it on screen was Ory's weapons
techniques. I took her out to our range in the Angeles Forest and gave her
about five hour's worth of weapons handling and shooting instruction. She
was very concerned about looking credible on screen, so she paid attention
and learned fast and well. Pretty good shot, too.
Given the attitude of the producers, I'm surprised they didn't tell her to
stop looking so realistic.
"Meagan, go ahead and put your finger on the trigger while you're clearing
the room. It looks more dramatic that way. And can we get you to rack the
slide on the gun right before you kick in the door, please?"
"But if I rack the slide, that means the gun was unloaded up till that
point, and no cop walks around with an unloaded gun, especially into a
hostile environment like this."
"Meagan, baby, who cares? It's dramatic!"
Did you watch the BLUE BLOODS on this very topic?
I don't remember that one, no.
Oh, it's great. The youngest Reagan and his partner get assigned to a
TV company shooting a female buddy cop show and end up as reluctant tech
advisers. The actresses want to do it right and the producers don't,
and wackiness ensues.

Google, Google ... here it is, season 7 ep 3 "The Price of Justice"
Available on The Netflix!
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-07 17:18:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.

Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-07 19:35:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.
Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
There's a facet here you may not have considered. When I was doing
science films for school kids, I found that at least half of the time
the science advisors were *wrong*
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-07 20:54:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.
Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
There's a facet here you may not have considered. When I was doing
science films for school kids, I found that at least half of the time
the science advisors were *wrong*
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-07 21:01:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.
Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
There's a facet here you may not have considered. When I was doing
science films for school kids, I found that at least half of the time
the science advisors were *wrong*
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-07 21:36:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel really
guilty about cashing those
checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a USSS
agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info they
were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.
Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
There's a facet here you may not have considered. When I was doing
science films for school kids, I found that at least half of the time
the science advisors were *wrong*
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Ubiquitous
2017-08-08 17:41:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
I just know that the "science advisors" for this show should feel
really guilty about cashing those checks.
Nah. A few years back I advised on that show where Meagan Ory played a
USSS agent assigned to protect the guy from LOST who had a supercomputer
implanted in his brain. I gave them all the realistic info, which they
promptly ignored in favor of 'drama'. I did my job and earned the paycheck.
No guilt about cashing it. Not my fault they chose not to use the info
they were paying for.
I'll make an exception for those advising someone who looks like Meagan
Ory. But you had to expect, on some level, that they'd listen to your
advice.
Science advisors, OTOH, *have* to know that they're gonna be ignored.
It's almost a law. They get hired so that skiffy shows can say that they
have them, and then they get ignored. Without fail. And if they don't
feel guilty about cashing the checks, then they should at least be
concerned that members of the audience who don't know how Hollywood
works might start to think that the *advisors* are the stupid ones in
the equation. And for those advisors with some name recognition among
geeks (e.g. Plait), that can do some damage to the ol' rep.
There's a facet here you may not have considered. When I was doing
science films for school kids, I found that at least half of the time
the science advisors were *wrong*
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
Short version:
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming" and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Jim G.
2017-08-09 20:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.

Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
something like this:

"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-09 21:14:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
Skeptic.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Jim G.
2017-08-10 20:53:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
Skeptic.
That didn't sound very sincere.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-10 20:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
Skeptic.
That didn't sound very sincere.
The dog didn't translate it right then.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Jim G.
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
Skeptic.
That didn't sound very sincere.
The dog didn't translate it right then.
We'll just add that to the list. Pretty soon, even the bagged food is
gonna be too good for him. At that point, I guess we'll just have to
stop for roadkill now and then. Because we both know that he'll use that
whole "I only have three legs because you sold one of them!" excuse to
get out of hunting on his own.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
shawn
2017-08-09 21:26:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:54:35 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
You would be wrong. I remember hearing this on the nightly news some
time ago and the article just confirms it. I'll copy a bit from the
article that explains why he sees global warming as a good thing.

"A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would aid
photosynthesis, which in turn contributes to increased plant growth.
This correlates to a greater volume of food production and better
quality food. Studies indicate that crops would utilize water more
efficiently, requiring less water. And colder areas along the farm
belt will experience longer growing seasons."

"Also, as the Earth warms, we are seeing beneficial changes to the
Earth's geography. For instance, Arctic sea ice is decreasing. This
development will create new commercial shipping lanes that provide
faster, more convenient and less costly routes between ports in Asia,
Europe, and eastern North America. This will increase international
trade and strengthen the world economy."

Here is a link to his actual words on the topic.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/24/dont-believe-hysteria-carbon-dioxide/

It's all about the possible benefits of global warming while ignoring
the negative impacts of global warming. I guess that makes sense if he
feels beaten up from all of the negative articles on global warming.
Jim G.
2017-08-10 20:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:54:35 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
You would be wrong. I remember hearing this on the nightly news some
time ago and the article just confirms it. I'll copy a bit from the
article that explains why he sees global warming as a good thing.
"A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would aid
photosynthesis, which in turn contributes to increased plant growth.
This correlates to a greater volume of food production and better
quality food. Studies indicate that crops would utilize water more
efficiently, requiring less water. And colder areas along the farm
belt will experience longer growing seasons."
"Also, as the Earth warms, we are seeing beneficial changes to the
Earth's geography. For instance, Arctic sea ice is decreasing. This
development will create new commercial shipping lanes that provide
faster, more convenient and less costly routes between ports in Asia,
Europe, and eastern North America. This will increase international
trade and strengthen the world economy."
Here is a link to his actual words on the topic.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/24/dont-believe-hysteria-carbon-dioxide/
It's all about the possible benefits of global warming while ignoring
the negative impacts of global warming. I guess that makes sense if he
feels beaten up from all of the negative articles on global warming.
Interesting. I'll have to check it out. I'm sure that the usual
pearl-clutching, knee-jerking types had the typical reaction. :)
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
suzeeq
2017-08-09 21:48:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
BTR1701
2017-08-09 22:54:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.

Try this experiment:

Put some ice in a glass.

Fill the glass with water.

Measure the level of the water in the glass.

Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.

When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.

It will be the same.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-09 23:07:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<1192274496.524011700.038893.address_is-***@news.giganews.co
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-10 01:48:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 02:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-10 03:58:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 14:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-10 15:11:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
suzeeq
2017-08-10 15:26:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
I like this explanation!
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 15:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
o
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about
that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
I like this explanation!
I bet you mean that.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-10 15:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
o
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about
that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
I like this explanation!
I bet you mean that.
No, I <3 it.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 15:41:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
I call it "The Ubi Effect"
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Obveeus
2017-08-10 17:24:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
ICE CREAM FOR MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!11!!!!1!
No, you were 4 minutes behind him.
And, mean SuzeeQ is back.
I told you, I'm a neutral observer.
Stripping me of hard won ice cream.
You know you cheat. You slingshot your posts around the Sun so they go
back in time to before the other person posted. This time you
miscalculated.
I call it "The Ubi Effect"
hee hee
anim8rfsk
2017-08-09 23:09:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
<1192274496.524011700.038893.address_is-***@news.giganews.co
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
This doesn't work in Arizona. "Put the ice/water combo out in the sun."
- my God, man, have you taken leave of your senses? How is she going to
measure a cloud of steam? The only result is that the water level is
*lower* than before.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Obveeus
2017-08-09 23:36:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
This doesn't work in Arizona. "Put the ice/water combo out in the sun."
- my God, man, have you taken leave of your senses? How is she going to
measure a cloud of steam? The only result is that the water level is
*lower* than before.
Up suseeq's way they call it 'sublimation'.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 00:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Obveeus
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
This doesn't work in Arizona. "Put the ice/water combo out in the sun."
- my God, man, have you taken leave of your senses? How is she going to
measure a cloud of steam? The only result is that the water level is
*lower* than before.
Up suseeq's way they call it 'sublimation'.
I hear all the leaves fall off her trees, too.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-10 01:49:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Obveeus
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
This doesn't work in Arizona. "Put the ice/water combo out in the sun."
- my God, man, have you taken leave of your senses? How is she going to
measure a cloud of steam? The only result is that the water level is
*lower* than before.
Up suseeq's way they call it 'sublimation'.
More like 'fog'.
suzeeq
2017-08-10 01:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
In article
m>,
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
This doesn't work in Arizona. "Put the ice/water combo out in the sun."
- my God, man, have you taken leave of your senses? How is she going to
measure a cloud of steam? The only result is that the water level is
*lower* than before.
True.
suzeeq
2017-08-10 01:47:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
Okay, I knew this, that the frozen water displaces the same volume as
the liquid water. But what if the whole ice cap melts, even the ice over
ground?
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 02:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
Okay, I knew this, that the frozen water displaces the same volume as
the liquid water. But what if the whole ice cap melts, even the ice over
ground?
Well, there *is* no ground under the Arctic ice cap, so no problem
there. And despite Plait's false claims, there's more ice than ever
there.

The south pole would be more problematic. A lot of sites I don't trust
say if all the ice melted (and understand, we're talking magic here) sea
level would rise 200'. But Antarctica's average temperature is like
*minus* 35°f, And most of it never gets above freezing. So, yeah, if
we managed to run the Earth's temperature up say 70°f, it would get wet.
But then we'd all be long dead before it did.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-10 03:30:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
Okay, I knew this, that the frozen water displaces the same volume as
the liquid water. But what if the whole ice cap melts, even the ice over
ground?
Well, there *is* no ground under the Arctic ice cap, so no problem
there. And despite Plait's false claims, there's more ice than ever
there.
Ohhh I'm thinking of the other one.
Post by anim8rfsk
The south pole would be more problematic. A lot of sites I don't trust
say if all the ice melted (and understand, we're talking magic here) sea
level would rise 200'. But Antarctica's average temperature is like
*minus* 35°f, And most of it never gets above freezing. So, yeah, if
we managed to run the Earth's temperature up say 70°f, it would get wet.
But then we'd all be long dead before it did.
Yeah, after the polar shift and the earth does a 180.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 14:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
Okay, I knew this, that the frozen water displaces the same volume as
the liquid water. But what if the whole ice cap melts, even the ice over
ground?
Well, there *is* no ground under the Arctic ice cap, so no problem
there. And despite Plait's false claims, there's more ice than ever
there.
Ohhh I'm thinking of the other one.
Post by anim8rfsk
The south pole would be more problematic. A lot of sites I don't trust
say if all the ice melted (and understand, we're talking magic here) sea
level would rise 200'. But Antarctica's average temperature is like
*minus* 35°f, And most of it never gets above freezing. So, yeah, if
we managed to run the Earth's temperature up say 70°f, it would get wet.
But then we'd all be long dead before it did.
Yeah, after the polar shift and the earth does a 180.
LOL
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-10 21:00:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 21:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
BTR1701
2017-08-10 22:10:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 23:22:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
Post by BTR1701
,
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
Jinx! You owe me ice cream.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-11 00:13:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
How would we know that since no one reads your posts?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
suzeeq
2017-08-11 00:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by BTR1701
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
How would we know that since no one reads your posts?
Besides, he always claims that but...
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BTR1701
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
He's getting pretty good at trying to steal ice cream that belongs to
others. :)
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-11 18:05:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
He's getting pretty good at trying to steal ice cream that belongs to
others. :)
No ice cream for YOU.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2017-08-11 21:36:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
I said it frakking first!!!!
He's getting pretty good at trying to steal ice cream that belongs to
others. :)
Uh huh.
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:45:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
It's Friday. Why do you ask?
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
suzeeq
2017-08-10 23:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:42:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Floating in the pool with the Scotch sounds like the best of both worlds. :)
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
suzeeq
2017-08-11 21:37:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Floating in the pool with the Scotch sounds like the best of both worlds. :)
Only if the pool is in the shade... and NOT in Arizona.
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-11 21:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Floating in the pool with the Scotch sounds like the best of both worlds. :)
Only if the pool is in the shade... and NOT in Arizona.
You're repeating your self, since there is no shade in Hell.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-11 22:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Floating in the pool with the Scotch sounds like the best of both worlds. :)
Only if the pool is in the shade... and NOT in Arizona.
You're repeating your self, since there is no shade in Hell.
We have what's known as "sunny shade"
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Dimensional Traveler
2017-08-12 00:03:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by BTR1701
Post by suzeeq
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
Nope.
Put some ice in a glass.
Fill the glass with water.
Measure the level of the water in the glass.
Put the ice/water combo out in the sun.
When the ice has melted, measure the water level again.
It will be the same.
That's another good example. Mine came to me as we were looking at an
above-ground pool, but I might have thought of yours if we'd been in a
bar nursing Scotches.
That sounds like a good place to be.
Floating in the pool with the Scotch sounds like the best of both worlds. :)
Only if the pool is in the shade... and NOT in Arizona.
You're repeating your self, since there is no shade in Hell.
We have what's known as "sunny shade"
AKA "Night"?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-09 22:58:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by suzeeq
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Well, once it floats up toward the equator there's going to be some
melting going on and that /might/ raise the sea levels somewhat.
It's an easy thing to test. Fill a glass with water to a point you can
mark, put in ice cubes, come back later and check the level.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
anim8rfsk
2017-08-09 22:54:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesom
e
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
It does a fine job of showing that Plait is a no nothing lying
douchebag, in his own words, though.

Ironically, he says "Smith's editorial is a forehead-smacking
tour-de-force of Orwellian writing. It's loaded with falsehoods and
ridiculous claims, truly divorced from reality." and then goes on to
demand you should listen to only one side, Plait's side.

And he ends his diatribe by saying, in bold type, highlighted in yellow:

"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"

He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.

But - and here's the very very best part - Plait is the science advisor
for SALVATION.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ubiquitous
2017-08-10 10:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesome
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
It does a fine job of showing that Plait is a no nothing lying
douchebag, in his own words, though.
Ironically, he says "Smith's editorial is a forehead-smacking
tour-de-force of Orwellian writing. It's loaded with falsehoods and
ridiculous claims, truly divorced from reality." and then goes on to
demand you should listen to only one side, Plait's side.
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
But - and here's the very very best part - Plait is the science advisor
for SALVATION.
Like I said, Plait's a tool.
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 15:16:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awe
some
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
It does a fine job of showing that Plait is a no nothing lying
douchebag, in his own words, though.
Ironically, he says "Smith's editorial is a forehead-smacking
tour-de-force of Orwellian writing. It's loaded with falsehoods and
ridiculous claims, truly divorced from reality." and then goes on to
demand you should listen to only one side, Plait's side.
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
But - and here's the very very best part - Plait is the science advisor
for SALVATION.
Like I said, Plait's a tool.
The worst part is, I think I used to correspond with this ass clown,
probably before his head injury, when he was working for James Randi.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-10 21:02:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awesom
e
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
It does a fine job of showing that Plait is a no nothing lying
douchebag, in his own words, though.
Ironically, he says "Smith's editorial is a forehead-smacking
tour-de-force of Orwellian writing. It's loaded with falsehoods and
ridiculous claims, truly divorced from reality." and then goes on to
demand you should listen to only one side, Plait's side.
Yeah, that last bit is getting far too typical. Scarily typical.
Science, by definition, is supposed to be about asking a question and
then seeking that question's answer. Too many people like Plait are
getting that backwards these days.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Post by anim8rfsk
But - and here's the very very best part - Plait is the science advisor
for SALVATION.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
shawn
2017-08-10 21:28:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 16:02:42 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 21:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 16:02:42 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Except for the "No" part, sure. "Sea Ice" is just ice that forms on sea
water. It doesn't affect sea level no matter what state it's in. But
these climate change clowns will tell you that "sea ice is perhaps the
most dangerous symptom of the Earth's rising temperatures."
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ubiquitous
2017-08-10 23:41:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 16:02:42 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Except for the "No" part, sure. "Sea Ice" is just ice that forms on sea
water. It doesn't affect sea level no matter what state it's in. But
these climate change clowns will tell you that "sea ice is perhaps the
most dangerous symptom of the Earth's rising temperatures."
In frozen or liquid form?
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:41:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Except for the "No" part, sure. "Sea Ice" is just ice that forms on sea
water. It doesn't affect sea level no matter what state it's in. But
these climate change clowns will tell you that "sea ice is perhaps the
most dangerous symptom of the Earth's rising temperatures."
In frozen or liquid form?
The critical consideration is whether it's natural sea ice or the
artificial kind made in a lab from a dihydrogen monoxide base.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
shawn
2017-08-11 18:24:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:41:51 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Except for the "No" part, sure. "Sea Ice" is just ice that forms on sea
water. It doesn't affect sea level no matter what state it's in. But
these climate change clowns will tell you that "sea ice is perhaps the
most dangerous symptom of the Earth's rising temperatures."
In frozen or liquid form?
The critical consideration is whether it's natural sea ice or the
artificial kind made in a lab from a dihydrogen monoxide base.
So long as it isn't heavy hydrogen we are probably okay.
Ubiquitous
2017-08-11 19:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:41:51 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea. So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Except for the "No" part, sure. "Sea Ice" is just ice that forms on sea
water. It doesn't affect sea level no matter what state it's in. But
these climate change clowns will tell you that "sea ice is perhaps the
most dangerous symptom of the Earth's rising temperatures."
In frozen or liquid form?
The critical consideration is whether it's natural sea ice or the
artificial kind made in a lab from a dihydrogen monoxide base.
So long as it isn't heavy hydrogen we are probably okay.
Does the ice machine run on real or artifical electricity?
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:39:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by shawn
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 16:02:42 -0500, "Jim G."
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Now let's be fair that he is correct. The sea ice that melts does get
into the ocean and becomes a part of the rising sea.
By definition, sea ice is *already* part of the ocean. So it doesn't
"get into" the ocean after it melts since it's already there.
Post by shawn
So he has that
right. That doesn't mean it makes the sea rise but it is a part of the
rising sea. See, anyone can do a Hunter style wank to explain the
unexplainable.
Nope. Nice try. :) He said "sea ice melting" and sea ice melting won't
raise the level. It'll just make the existing level more water and less ice.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
anim8rfsk
2017-08-10 21:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Good point. Scary point, but good point. And Plait *is* good pals with
*your* best pal, Neil D. Tyson.
Speak to me of this Plait. I saw your posts before but I'm unfamiliar
with him.
The most ironic thing to mention is that he's the guy behind the
long-running blog called "Bad Astronomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Plait
He's a skeptic but believes in "global warming"
Well, we *are* in a warming period. It's just a question of degree (so
to speak) and how much is caused by evil humans who refuse to live in
yurts and live on bark.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a "science" fan about that
'berg that broke off in Antarctica a little while back. It went
"I wonder how much that thing is gonna raise sea levels."
"Not at all."
"What do you mean?"
"It won't raise them at all."
"How can you know that?"
"Because it was already floating."
"So?"
"Something that's floating has already raised the sea level as much as
it's going to raise it."
"That's not what I read."
"Then you need to read something else."
"How can you be so sure?"
"If you're floating in a pool and holding on to the edge of it and then
let go, does the water level rise and spill out of the pool?"
"No." [five second pause] "Oh."
Post by Ubiquitous
and has an irrational hatred of
conservatives.
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/rep-lamar-smith-thinks-global-warming-is-awes
om
e
There's enough snark in that link name to keep me from clicking on it.
And call me a skeptic, but I doubt that it accurately reflects smith's
views.
It does a fine job of showing that Plait is a no nothing lying
douchebag, in his own words, though.
Ironically, he says "Smith's editorial is a forehead-smacking
tour-de-force of Orwellian writing. It's loaded with falsehoods and
ridiculous claims, truly divorced from reality." and then goes on to
demand you should listen to only one side, Plait's side.
Yeah, that last bit is getting far too typical. Scarily typical.
Science, by definition, is supposed to be about asking a question and
then seeking that question's answer. Too many people like Plait are
getting that backwards these days.
Yep. I mean, these people showed up and listened to the sales pitch and
didn't buy a timeshare. Says as much about the pitchman as it does his
potential victims.
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Yeah. Syfy is pushing the global warming agenda now, probably on that
theory.
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
But - and here's the very very best part - Plait is the science advisor
for SALVATION.
It's as if you don't even read my posts anymore. :)
Heh. I remembered seeing the "does this ijiot show even have a science
advisor" exchanges.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Jim G.
2017-08-11 17:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Yeah. Syfy is pushing the global warming agenda now, probably on that
theory.
And pushing it was probably a condition of getting Plait to come over
from Salon. And heck, you can't gain more respect in the scientific
community than by writing "science" for Salon or Syfy.
--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“It smells like bad beer and worse choices. I'll make it work.” – Rosita
Bustillos, WYNONNA EARP
David Barnett
2017-08-11 21:06:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <omkpsv$jh9$***@dont-email.me>, ***@geemail.com.invalid
says...
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Yeah. Syfy is pushing the global warming agenda now, probably on that
theory.
And pushing it was probably a condition of getting Plait to come over
from Salon. And heck, you can't gain more respect in the scientific
community than by writing "science" for Salon or Syfy.
Does water evaporate from the sea?
--
David Barnett
suzeeq
2017-08-11 21:36:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Barnett
says...
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Yeah. Syfy is pushing the global warming agenda now, probably on that
theory.
And pushing it was probably a condition of getting Plait to come over
from Salon. And heck, you can't gain more respect in the scientific
community than by writing "science" for Salon or Syfy.
Does water evaporate from the sea?
Yes.
anim8rfsk
2017-08-11 22:22:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Barnett
says...
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Jim G.
Post by anim8rfsk
"there is a contribution to sea level rise due to sea ice melting"
That's just stupid. He probably meant to use a different term, but the
one he chose is just stupid.
Post by anim8rfsk
He begins it with a picture of him with The Shat, to give himself
credibility.
To suck up to the "science fans" who watch superhero movies and think
that they're a substitute for actual learning.
Yeah. Syfy is pushing the global warming agenda now, probably on that
theory.
And pushing it was probably a condition of getting Plait to come over
from Salon. And heck, you can't gain more respect in the scientific
community than by writing "science" for Salon or Syfy.
Does water evaporate from the sea?
Yep, and falls as snow on the poles.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Loading...