Posts Made By: Robert Pasken

What kind of dovetail/rings combination did you use? I am attempting to mount my favorite scope (8" f/7) on a cg-5 so i can take it to starparties. I also have a sonotube tube, but my is coated with carbon fiber

Ed Pilkington will lie in a fake newspaper article. How in the world can Pilkington know in advance what Hansen will or will not say. Give me a break

Hansen says he will tell Congress "that the next president faces a unique opportunity to galvanize the country around the need for a transformed, nonpolluting energy system."

So who shall we believe Hansen who will testify before Congress or some idiot looking to sell more webpage hits :C

I would add that there should also be a public display of the officials in charge of the bank, think of the officers of the bank in stocks and chains in the town square or some other equally public venue. A supply of well ripened fruits and vegetables should be available to public free of charge in the same venue. Once these chronic gamblers loose everything and are publicly humiliated they might, and I am not very optimistic, become more conservative with other peoples money

Obviously you are only reading the wingnuts in the blogosphere. From the APS webpage:

APS Climate Change Statement
APS Position Remains Unchanged

The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.

Based on the above I would say there has been no change other than an increase in the bleating from the same tired group of faux conservatives who cann't get their math or science straight.

I have been on two solar eclipse trips. I can only add that even though you may be taking pictures of the eclipse itself, remember to actually look at the eclipse. Just before totality watch and just after for the shadow bands.

When some one lies about events, that have a profound effect on debate should they not be called liars? When people lie to slant the debate it needs to be pointed out that they are lying so that those who do not know can properly judge.

If some continually posts the same material over and over again that has been documented to be wrong or from biased sources, loudly sings "la-la-la I cann't hear you" doesn't it make you wonder what is wrong?

When a "scientist", publishes a paper that calls into question global warming, finds an error, publishes a correction in the scientific press that shows global warming is occurring, but continues to push his flawed results in the popular media what should they be called?

When a popular media outlet selectively, with malice of forethought, edits interviews with researchers to deliberately misrepresent the researchers results loses a law suite what should you call them?

When a "scientist" sole source of funding is from a corporation publishes results, that have been previously vetted by the corporation, that are in contradiction to known physical laws, what should they be called? What should posters who continually raise the same discredited research over and over again be called?

Well you got what you asked for :S The discussion has turned even farther away from a debate about the science and consequences and further down the path of political diatribe. Looks more like the politics forum every day. :S

Why do you keep posting the same misinformation from the same discredited people over and over again? :S This isn't anything new or different. same old same old

I've always wondered why the daytime sunlight couldn't be used to turn water to steam that you then use to heat some media that keeps its heat. When you need electricity when the sun isn't shining you dump the water back into steam to turn a generator. In places like Arizona and New Mexico there is a surplus of sunlight and what inefficiencies in the process should be more than made up for by the abundance of sunlight. In place like New England even in the winter there are plenty of rivers and streams that don't freeze over and have enough drop that water driven turbines could generate power. I grew up in New England and I've always wondered why we dismantled all the generating plants that worked so well in the 40's and 50's. If the stuff from MIT works out all the better.

Jim you said:

Now for another silly question. In the 70's it was predicted that we would be heading into an ice age instead of a warmer planet. Do we now know if the observations and predictions at that time was a result of either Global Dimming or the Asian Brown Clouds?

No such thing as a silly questions when asked in an attempt to learn. In the 1970's a single scientist published a paper that predicted an ice age. The results of the paper were published in the popular press (specifically Newsweek and later Time). The study cited was "Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate" (Rasool 1971; Science). The paper doesn't actually predict an ice age, rather it projects that if aerosol levels were to be increased 6 to 8 times over 1970 levels and then sustained at those levels, it may trigger an ice age . In the peer reviewed scientific papers from the 1970's, very few papers (7 in total) predicted global cooling, while significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming due to CO2. A good reference is
"The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus" Peterson et. al. (2005; Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society)