• Re: OT: "Global Warming" scam - carbon not responsible: finally the evi

    From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 14:12:15 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series
    that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books
    after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.





    --
    “Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
    a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

    Dennis Miller

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Wed Feb 16 14:30:15 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series
    that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous >references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books >after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 06:31:14 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 12:37:05 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    The link wants you to install the Yandex search engine on your computer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yandex


    Yandex a Russian owned company established in the Netherlands.

    It looks as if this would then allow you to download all of Cursitor Doom's antiquated mis-information in one huge lump. From what Cursitor Doom has posted here before, it is collection of a bunch of stuff that a half-wit like Cursitor Doom can read as
    justifying his mad conspiracy theory that anthropogenic global warming isn't actually happening.

    What other crap would come with the Yandex browser isn't spelled out, but I wouldn't touch it was a barge-pole. The Ukraine doesn't like it.

    "On June 1, 2017, Yandex closed its offices in Kyiv and Odessa, Ukraine after the Security Service of Ukraine raided the offices and accused the company of illegally collecting Ukrainian users’ data and sending it to Russian security agencies.The firm
    denied any wrongdoing. In May 2017, all Yandex services were banned in Ukraine by Presidential Decree No. 133/2017.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From newshound@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Feb 16 14:47:32 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.



    ROFL.

    Going back to "authentication", and a bit OT, I was very interested to
    discover from reading "All the President's men" (and the subsequent
    film) of just how careful *good* journalists are to obtain independent verification of "facts".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 14:39:59 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 14:30, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series
    that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous
    references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books
    after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.



    --
    To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 06:50:17 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:30:27 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series >that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous >references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Scholars are supposed to cite the literature, but they are also supposed to notice when the literature has got stuff wrong. The literature review in my Ph.D. thesis does include one comment about a German paper which reported experiments which clearly
    hadn't been done as carefully as they might have been.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books >after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.

    Probably not. The Anglo Saxons didn't invade the UK until after the Roman empire had collapsed, and the Roman records saw the ancient Britons as Celts. They didn't exterminate them, any more than the Anglo-Saxons did (or the Danes who invaded the more
    northern parts of England a bit later).

    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    None of which you seem to have read in any detail. You do seem to have a lot in common with Flyguy, who post links to documents which he seems to imagine support his point of view, and don't.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to newshound on Wed Feb 16 07:02:25 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes too.

    ROFL.

    Going back to "authentication", and a bit OT, I was very interested to discover from reading "All the President's men" (and the subsequent
    film) of just how careful *good* journalists are to obtain independent verification of "facts".

    And Cursitor Doom is the exact antithesis of good journalist - he decides which facts suit his story and ignores everything else that doesn't.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Wed Feb 16 07:25:08 2022
    On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 10:02:37 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.
    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes too.

    The fact that Europeans have a Neanderthal in the woodpile doesn't mean they aren't from the same sub-Saharan African stock as everyone else alive today.

    Doh! I saw this subject and didn't want to get into what will most certainly a silly discussion very quickly involving the slinging of insults. But here I am. Oh, well.

    --

    Rick C.

    - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Wed Feb 16 15:32:36 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:39:59 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 14:30, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series
    that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a >>> German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous
    references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books >>> after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Ah! You've already been got-at! Once upon a time it was Mesopotamia
    before the Globalists decided Africa was more inclusive. So now of
    course we all ultimately come from Africa and from one original seed
    called "Eve" cos it ticks all their boxes. In fact tomorrow's Eve will
    no doubt be a lesbian!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Feb 16 16:09:27 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:bcc89f45-66ff-4363-9127-5419906f618bn@googlegroups.com:

    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound
    wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and
    sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes
    too.

    snip

    And do not forget the Aboriginals. They are their own 'race' as
    well. "Australoid".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Feb 16 17:27:29 2022
    On 16/02/2022 16:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound
    wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and
    sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes
    too.


    And where do you think those Neanderthals and Denisovian, or their
    ancestors, came from? Could it have been ... sub-Sahara Africa?

    The descent of modern humans was not a simple line - more of a family
    web than a family tree - but all lines trace back to Africa.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 16:21:34 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> wrote in news:2m4q0hd7fq4opot5rbuumsl4t83tptk6te@4ax.com:

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:39:59 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 14:30, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those
    like Dave Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one,
    despite living a mere tube ride from one of the finest ones in
    the world. Here is the evidence for all those who for whatever
    reason prefer to simply click on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an
    encyclopedia series that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing
    link' as a clearly established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy
    'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki
    article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW
    only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were
    transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing
    numerous references, all of which contained the same obvious
    typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing
    more than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the
    scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare
    with books after that where scientific archaeology reveals
    something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the
    original ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who
    were exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Ah! You've already been got-at! Once upon a time it was
    Mesopotamia before the Globalists decided Africa was more
    inclusive. So now of course we all ultimately come from Africa and
    from one original seed called "Eve" cos it ticks all their boxes.
    In fact tomorrow's Eve will no doubt be a lesbian!


    We are ALL "Out of Africa".

    But Bill is right about what is included in some Europeans, and
    that it is not the other way around.

    So Africans are pure Africans, but other races around the world
    have some other species mixed into their genome.

    So you are both right. Bill is in the direction he iterated. And
    you are about the original source of Homo-Sapiens.

    But THIS source pretty much nails it and it does not come from your
    stupid source choice.

    The rest of the world's anthropologists found "Mitchondrial Eve" in
    Africa, not Russians. So why listen to their info source?

    <https://www.yourgenome.org/stories/evolution-of-modern-humans>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rod Speed@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 04:29:18 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 01:30:15 +1100, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series
    that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts'
    from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a
    German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous
    references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books
    after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly
    different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.

    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    Your problem is that we know from ice cores etc that that book's original
    claim about the CO2 level at the turn of the 20th century is just plain
    wrong.

    And your beloved Britannica eventually realised
    that their earlier printed editions were wrong too.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 16 19:36:07 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 04:29:18 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
    Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Tim+ about trolling Rodent Speed:
    He is by far the most persistent troll who seems to be able to get under the skin of folk who really should know better. Since when did arguing with a
    troll ever achieve anything (beyond giving the troll pleasure)?
    MID: <1421057667.659518815.743467.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Vir Campestris@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Feb 16 22:18:52 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovan that is...

    Andy

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Wed Feb 16 19:56:52 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 2:32:49 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:39:59 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 14:30, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
    <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series >>> that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts' >>> from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a >>> German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous >>> references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books >>> after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!

    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Ah! You've already been got-at! Once upon a time it was Mesopotamia
    before the Globalists decided Africa was more inclusive. So now of
    course we all ultimately come from Africa and from one original seed
    called "Eve" cos it ticks all their boxes. In fact tomorrow's Eve will
    no doubt be a lesbian!

    Mitochondrial Eve was clearly African. The mitochondrial genome is very small and only passed down in the egg. The bulk of the genome is rather larger, and diploid, and reflects both male and female ancestors. There are a lot of them, and some of them
    aren't shared between people on different continents.

    The story is rather more complicated than you seem to know, and probably a lot more complicated than you are going to be willing to get your head around. Globalists don't come into it.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Wed Feb 16 19:49:33 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 2:25:20 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 10:02:37 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes too.

    The fact that Europeans have a Neanderthal in the woodpile doesn't mean they aren't from the same sub-Saharan African stock as everyone else alive today.

    All human being have much the same genome, but there are minor regional variations. We all have a lot of ancestors, and don't share all of them.

    Doh! I saw this subject and didn't want to get into what will most certainly a silly discussion very quickly involving the slinging of insults. But here I am. Oh, well.

    You might yet learn something.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to Vir Campestris on Thu Feb 17 08:51:20 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovan that is...

    Andy
    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and got lost


    --
    Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Feb 17 01:56:19 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that is...

    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.

    Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

    Climate change is is about climate. Socialism is about social organisation. Socialists could be expected to take a dim view of capitalists digging up fossil carbon and selling to be burned as fuel when this happens to wreck the environment for
    everybody but climate science is just about way that the extra CO2 in the atmosphere influences the climate, which isn't any kind of political fact. The scientists involved would come exactly the same conclusion if there weren't any political
    implications.

    The capitalists digging up the fossil carbon are happy to lie about the subject in all sorts of different ways in effort to keep on making money out of it for a bit longer, but only gullible twits imagine that they aren't lying.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Feb 17 12:36:13 2022
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and
    got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move out of
    Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As different
    parts of the populations became more isolated in different regions of
    the world, they evolved and we got Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in
    Asia, and no doubt many more - fossil remains never give a complete
    picture. Later migrations of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to
    intermixing in different parts of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are all
    still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line of ancestry.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Streater@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 12:28:59 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 17 Feb 2022 at 08:51:20 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovan that is...

    Andy
    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and got lost

    It was tropical rainforest back then, wasn't it?

    --
    When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious what they had in mind was not democratic. In Britain you vote for a government so the government has to listen to you, and if you don't like it you can change it.

    Tony Benn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to David Brown on Thu Feb 17 04:38:22 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 10:36:25 PM UTC+11, David Brown wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and
    got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.

    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As different
    parts of the populations became more isolated in different regions of
    the world, they evolved and we got Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more - fossil remains never give a complete
    picture. Later migrations of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to
    intermixing in different parts of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes. I rather doubt that a modern human could interbreed with Homo Erectus. The moderately diverse great apes that started moving out of Africa two million years ago are clearly our near ancestors, but it's a long stretch to
    call them sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes would be fine. The Natural Philosopher seems to be "natural" in the Shakespearean sense of being under-educated.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are all
    still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line of ancestry.

    Sub-Saharan great apes, and our ancestors were a rather small subset of them.

    https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-floresiensis

    was also descended from that stock. There doesn't seem to be any genetic evidence of interbreeding with them in the genomes collected so far.

    But it is early days yet. When mitochondrial Eve was proclaimed, Y-chromosome Adam was thought to be a contemporary. About a decade later somebody found about a dozen Y-chromosomes in American males of African descent that pushed him back quite a bit
    further.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Feb 17 15:48:51 2022
    On 17/02/2022 13:38, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 10:36:25 PM UTC+11, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded
    a bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.

    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations of
    Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts of
    the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes.

    We are /all/ great apes. That's the family of species that includes
    humans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutangs (and sub-species).

    I rather doubt that a modern human
    could interbreed with Homo Erectus.

    The last common ancestor of Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals was Homo Heidelbergensis, who came from Homo Erectus. Different descendant
    species from H.H. interbreed - that's how we got some Neanderthal genes
    mixed with our mostly Homo Sapien genes. Since both Neanderthal and
    Homo Sapiens are closer to H.H. than to each other, one would assume
    that they could interbreed too (if they existed in overlapping time
    frames). Could modern Homo Sapiens interbreed with Homo Erectus? I
    don't know if anyone has done any serious work on it, but it would not
    surprise me in the slightest.



    The moderately diverse great apes
    that started moving out of Africa two million years ago are clearly
    our near ancestors, but it's a long stretch to call them sub-Saharan Africans.


    The original comment was /clearly/ using the term "Africans" to include
    our close hominoid ancestors.

    I presume you are using the term "great apes" meaning "great apes other
    than humans" - i.e., species that looked more like chimpanzees or
    gorillas than modern humans. If you were to take a Homo Erectus and put
    him or her in jeans and a t-shirt, few people would look twice.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes would be fine. The Natural Philosopher
    seems to be "natural" in the Shakespearean sense of being
    under-educated.

    We are discussing the facts here, not any person's education. You got
    it wrong. Either you misinterpreted his post, or you were under the
    incorrect impression that the Neanderthals split off from the main line
    of Homo Sapien ancestors before they could reasonably be classified as
    "early humanoids". Stop making excuses or trying to pass the blame, and
    lets move on from this.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adrian Caspersz@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Thu Feb 17 19:08:44 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u


    Great, I now have a Russian cookie on my system.

    --
    Adrian C

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Doe@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 18 00:12:48 2022
    Bozo Bill Sloman is an attention-craving chronic liar who cannot be
    reasoned with...

    "the Mueller investigation was about Trump only because Trump made it so"
    (Bozo paraphrased)

    "the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions"
    (Bill Sloman)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to David Brown on Thu Feb 17 17:27:40 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 1:49:01 AM UTC+11, David Brown wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 13:38, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 10:36:25 PM UTC+11, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    <snip>

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes.

    We are /all/ great apes. That's the family of species that includes
    humans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutangs (and sub-species).

    I rather doubt that a modern human could interbreed with Homo Erectus.

    The last common ancestor of Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals was Homo Heidelbergensis, who came from Homo Erectus. Different descendant
    species from H.H. interbreed - that's how we got some Neanderthal genes mixed with our mostly Homo Sapien genes. Since both Neanderthal and
    Homo Sapiens are closer to H.H. than to each other, one would assume
    that they could interbreed too (if they existed in overlapping time
    frames). Could modern Homo Sapiens interbreed with Homo Erectus? I
    don't know if anyone has done any serious work on it, but it would not surprise me in the slightest.

    It would surprise me, but it is an entirely pointless speculation.

    The moderately diverse great apes that started moving out of Africa two million years ago are clearly our near ancestors, but it's a long stretch to call them sub-Saharan Africans.

    The original comment was /clearly/ using the term "Africans" to include our close hominoid ancestors.

    What on earth makes you think that? Gorillas and chimpanzees are both African great apes, but we don't call them Africans. The term is reserved for other modern humans.

    I presume you are using the term "great apes" meaning "great apes other
    than humans" - i.e., species that looked more like chimpanzees or
    gorillas than modern humans. If you were to take a Homo Erectus and put
    him or her in jeans and a t-shirt, few people would look twice.

    No. I'm not. I'm well aware that modern humans are just another species of great ape - and you are too.
    "We are /all/ great apes. That's the family of species that includes humans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutangs (and sub-species)."
    Speculations about what a Homo Erectus would look like in jeans and a t-shirt are just speculations. Museum speculation based on the very limited number of bones we've got do vary quite a lot.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes would be fine. The Natural Philosopher seems to be "natural" in the Shakespearean sense of being under-educated.

    We are discussing the facts here, not any person's education.

    And what is the "fact" you seem to think we are discussing? That the Natural Philosopher seems to think that the was only one out-of-Africa migration and they were all modern human beings that he could call Africans?

    You got it wrong. Either you misinterpreted his post, or you were under the incorrect impression that the Neanderthals split off from the main line of Homo Sapien ancestors before they could reasonably be classified as "early humanoids".

    They didn't split off. They were a separate population of early humans, but they could - and clearly did - interbreed with modern humans, which is why I've got some three hundred Neanderthal genes. Whether they died out or merely got merged back in to
    the European human gene pool is an unanswerable question. The definition of a species as "a group that can interbreed" has problems - geographical isolation produces groups that can still interbreed even though they look rather different and occupy
    somewhat different ecological niches. Look up "ring species" sometime. Each sub-species around the ring can interbreed with their closest neighbours, except for the pair of species that met when the clockwise expansion around the ring ran into the
    anticlockwise expansion.

    Stop making excuses or trying to pass the blame, and lets move on from this.

    "Blame"? Making excuses? I'm just being pedantic, which is worth doing with racist right-wingers.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 17:29:59 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 11:12:59 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:

    <snip>

    John Doe is a half-witted troll who posts irrelevant nonsense in threads he doesn't understand.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Feb 18 03:46:59 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:sul2a8$af6$1@dont-email.me:

    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovan that is...

    Andy
    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and
    got lost


    Nope... different species. And some may have gotten mixed in some euro
    folks before they extincted.

    Nice try though.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to David Brown on Fri Feb 18 03:49:49 2022
    David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in news:sulbvd$gis$1@dont-email.me:

    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations
    of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts
    of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are
    all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line
    of ancestry.

    No... Not from same roots.

    H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to DecadentLinux...@decadence.org on Thu Feb 17 21:35:53 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 2:50:00 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
    David Brown <david...@hesbynett.no> wrote in news:sulbvd$gis$1...@dont-email.me:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations
    of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts
    of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are
    all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line
    of ancestry.

    No... Not from same roots.

    H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species.

    This is debatable. They clearly could interbreed with homo sapiens and the off-spring were clearly fertile, which nominally makes us both members of same species.

    It there were cultural and behavioral differences that made interbreeding unlikely they might have been on the way to becoming a separate species. but it's a bit late to make claims about that.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc on Fri Feb 18 09:36:46 2022
    On 18/02/2022 04:49, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
    David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in news:sulbvd$gis$1@dont-email.me:

    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations
    of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts
    of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from
    Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are
    all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line
    of ancestry.

    No... Not from same roots.

    H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species


    Both of /these/ had the same roots. Think grandparents, not parents.

    And H.N and H.S. interbreed. I don't believe we have any way of knowing
    how successful this was - maybe only a very small percentage of attempts resulted in viable offspring, which would justify classifying them as
    separate species. Or maybe interbreeding was very successful, which
    would suggest calling them sub-species. Either way, they interbred.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dave Plowman (News)@21:1/5 to Adrian Caspersz on Fri Feb 18 11:25:53 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    In article <j77kpsFknv9U2@mid.individual.net>,
    Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u


    Great, I now have a Russian cookie on my system.

    And now we know where Mr Doom gets all his information.

    --
    *If a mute swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap?

    Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
    To e-mail, change noise into sound.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Fri Feb 18 11:24:15 2022
    On 18/02/2022 05:35, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 2:50:00 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
    David Brown <david...@hesbynett.no> wrote in
    news:sulbvd$gis$1...@dont-email.me:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations
    of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts
    of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from
    Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are
    all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line
    of ancestry.

    No... Not from same roots.

    H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species.

    This is debatable. They clearly could interbreed with homo sapiens and the off-spring were clearly fertile, which nominally makes us both members of same species.

    That depends on your perspective. There are loads of quite radically
    different plant species that will hybridise easily and certain F1
    hybrids can have remarkable properties. It even depends critically on
    which is the egg donor and which is the pollen donor. There is a naming convention for such hybrids and the multiple crossing to concentrate the
    most desirable traits for houseplants gets very complicated.

    https://sgplants.com/blogs/news/echeveria-gibbiflora-hybrids-a-short-history

    More extreme and less likely to set viable seed are intergeneric hybrids
    - some of which may be due to the plants really being more closely
    related than their classical appearance might suggest. DNA sequencing is finding a few unlikely looking plants are in fact closely related.

    Taxonomy is forever changing with the lumpers and splitters fighting it
    out over valid names for genera and what species belongs where.

    https://www.thespruce.com/what-is-intergeneric-hybrid-3269459

    https://www.sublimesucculents.com/succulent-hybrids-explained/#1-plant-hybridization-and-naming-nomenclature

    You sometimes even get natural hybrids occurring in the wild. I have a
    fairly rare one on my windowsill from wild collected seed. Waiting to
    see when it has flowers what symmetry and colour they have.

    Mostly they stay and/or become pure species by geographic isolation of
    small populations or having different flowering times.

    It there were cultural and behavioral differences that made interbreeding unlikely they might have been on the way to becoming a separate species. but it's a bit late to make claims about that.

    They were arguably a distinct different species but not so different
    that they couldn't interbreed successfully at least some of the time.

    It is possible that early European Homo Sapiens with their few percent
    of Neanderthal DNA out crosses would have an element of hybrid vigour.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Fri Feb 18 13:18:50 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 18/02/22 11:25, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
    In article <j77kpsFknv9U2@mid.individual.net>,
    Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid> wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u


    Great, I now have a Russian cookie on my system.

    And now we know where Mr Doom gets all his information.

    No surprise there, given that he previously posted...


    On 31/08/17 22:59, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:22:14 -0700, lonmkusch wrote:

    While you're deciding, I think I'm going to stroll over to RT for some
    good unbiased news.

    If you can't see that RT is a zillion times more reputable as a news
    source than CNN/NBC/BBC et al, you must be totally blind. Sure they
    aren't 100% impartial; no news organisation is. But they are my most
    trusted news source even if not yours - until such time as I ever
    discover otherwise, of course.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Eather@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Sun Feb 20 13:25:23 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    2.If the world's temperature was stable then the number of record high temperatures would be dropping slowly.

    3.If the world's temperature was climbing then the number of record high temperatures would be rising.

    Do you not agree that these possibilities/projections are correct?

    In fact they are the only possibilities. You can easily simulate these projections with any random number generator.

    Pick any "average" you like (within the range of the generator).

    Set the Highest record temp to equal the average

    initialize a iteration counter and start the simulation

    generate a random temperature

    is this temperature the record high? if so update the record high
    temperature and log the iteration.

    When done analyze the pattern of record highs and iterations.

    Which of the above three possibilities does it match?

    repeat with the average temp going slowly down and slowly going up (1%
    per 100 hundred thousand iterations would be reasonable for a planet
    simulation but pick whatever you are comfortable with)

    Compare this to real world date. Don't cherry pick. Grab more than half
    a dozen records from around the world that go back over 100 year - the
    longer the better.

    Which pattern does that match? You have your answer to if global warming
    is real.

    Even if you think everyone else is in on the scan, you have verifiable
    hand written paper records more than 100 years old. Unless you can
    believe that these now dead people who made these logs over 100 years
    ago were deliberately trying to collude with scientists today by
    changing data to affect the results of a science that didn't even exist
    in there day then you have an answer to if global warming exists. If you
    think that the logs were created 100 years ago to deceive us today then
    you are simply insane.

    Now the other and possibly more pertinent question - do man made carbon emissions increase global temperature? The answer is:

    Who gives a shit! The global temperature is going up that is easily
    provable if you ignore the fake science and conspiracy theories*.

    It doesn't matter why the planet is warming, we will suffer the
    consequences. Reducing atmospheric carbon is one of very few ways we can
    do anything to lower the temperature on a planetary scale.

    Some of you people are like a family shopping in a mall when a deranged
    shooter comes in and starts killing. Instead of doing the smart thing
    and trying save yourself and your family, you go "well I didn't cause
    the problem so I don't have to do anything".

    Absolutely true, but you and your kids will bear the consequences.

    Don't look up!




    *do you remember the story of the Washington Pizza joint that had a
    basement with kids trapped in it for the amusement of pedophiles? A
    story originating with BriteBart (I cant be bothered to check the
    correct spelling for them). A guy armed with a gun ran into the place
    with the intention to free the kids - good on him for caring, not so
    good for his method. FBI had to come and investigate. No kids found and
    no basement either. There had NEVER been a basement or imprisoned kids
    in the building at all! BriteBart fabricated the whole story and then
    hid behind "we have to protect confidential sources" while the poor
    shumck who believed them is in jail.

    I do believe in free press and the need to protect sources (I wish
    Australia was more like the US in this regard), but this then requires
    the public to be discerning. An unchecked story, that was never even
    possible (no basement and no possibility of a basement) from a non
    existent "confidential source" says everything you need to know about
    that news agency and their stories.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rod Speed@21:1/5 to David Eather on Sun Feb 20 14:59:43 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    David Eather <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote
    Cursitor Doom wrote

    Gentlemen,
    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:
    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u
    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)


    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    2.If the world's temperature was stable then the number of record high temperatures would be dropping slowly.

    3.If the world's temperature was climbing then the number of record high temperatures would be rising.

    Do you not agree that these possibilities/projections are correct?

    In fact they are the only possibilities. You can easily simulate these projections with any random number generator.

    Pick any "average" you like (within the range of the generator).

    Set the Highest record temp to equal the average

    initialize a iteration counter and start the simulation

    generate a random temperature

    is this temperature the record high? if so update the record high
    temperature and log the iteration.

    When done analyze the pattern of record highs and iterations.

    Which of the above three possibilities does it match?

    repeat with the average temp going slowly down and slowly going up (1%
    per 100 hundred thousand iterations would be reasonable for a planet simulation but pick whatever you are comfortable with)

    Compare this to real world date. Don't cherry pick. Grab more than half
    a dozen records from around the world that go back over 100 year - the
    longer the better.

    Which pattern does that match? You have your answer to if global warming
    is real.

    Even if you think everyone else is in on the scan, you have verifiable
    hand written paper records more than 100 years old. Unless you can
    believe that these now dead people who made these logs over 100 years
    ago were deliberately trying to collude with scientists today by
    changing data to affect the results of a science that didn't even exist
    in there day then you have an answer to if global warming exists. If you think that the logs were created 100 years ago to deceive us today then
    you are simply insane.

    Now the other and possibly more pertinent question - do man made carbon emissions increase global temperature? The answer is:

    Who gives a shit! The global temperature is going up that is easily
    provable if you ignore the fake science and conspiracy theories*.

    It doesn't matter why the planet is warming, we will suffer the
    consequences.

    Or welcome it on that soggy little frigid island and in plenty of
    other places like Canada and Siberia etc.

    Reducing atmospheric carbon is one of very few ways we can do anything
    to lower the temperature on a planetary scale.

    That remains to be seen and for some reason fools are too
    stupid to adopt by far the best way of doing that, nukes.

    Some of you people are like a family shopping in a mall when a deranged shooter comes in and starts killing. Instead of doing the smart thing
    and trying save yourself and your family, you go "well I didn't cause
    the problem so I don't have to do anything".

    Absolutely true, but you and your kids will bear the consequences.

    It remains to be seen if the consequences are undesirable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Rod Speed on Sat Feb 19 21:35:49 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 2:59:59 PM UTC+11, Rod Speed wrote:
    David Eather <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote
    Cursitor Doom wrote

    <snip>

    Even if you think everyone else is in on the scan, you have verifiable hand written paper records more than 100 years old. Unless you can
    believe that these now dead people who made these logs over 100 years
    ago were deliberately trying to collude with scientists today by
    changing data to affect the results of a science that didn't even exist
    in there day then you have an answer to if global warming exists. If you think that the logs were created 100 years ago to deceive us today then you are simply insane.

    Now the other and possibly more pertinent question - do man made carbon emissions increase global temperature? The answer is:

    Who gives a shit! The global temperature is going up that is easily provable if you ignore the fake science and conspiracy theories*.

    It doesn't matter why the planet is warming, we will suffer the consequences.

    Or welcome it on that soggy little frigid island and in plenty of
    other places like Canada and Siberia etc.

    One of the side effects of global warming is more extreme extreme weather events. They aren't welcome wherever they hit.

    Reducing atmospheric carbon is one of very few ways we can do anything
    to lower the temperature on a planetary scale.
    That remains to be seen and for some reason fools are too
    stupid to adopt by far the best way of doing that, nukes.

    What's good about nuclear energy? It doesn't increase atmospheric carbon dioxide levels which does give it an advantage over burning fossil carbon, but as a way of generating electricity it is expensive. The Australian electricity generating industry has
    been shutting down coal-fired plants for years because it's cheaper to generate electricity from wind farms and solar cells. Nuclear generating plants don't offer the same cost advantage.

    The industry is investing in grid scales batteries and pumped hydro energy storage to cover nights and windless periods - it's already got fast-start gas-fired generating capacity, and that will used less as the grid storage ramps up.

    Some of you people are like a family shopping in a mall when a deranged shooter comes in and starts killing. Instead of doing the smart thing
    and trying save yourself and your family, you go "well I didn't cause
    the problem so I don't have to do anything".

    Absolutely true, but you and your kids will bear the consequences.

    It remains to be seen if the consequences are undesirable.

    Only for people who swallow the fossil fuel extraction industry climate change denial propaganda. Gullible suckers, in other words.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au on Sat Feb 19 21:40:38 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from >conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    The planet has been warming gently since the end of the LIA. And
    that's good.

    More CO2 is good too.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Feb 19 23:29:55 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 4:40:54 PM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from >conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    But that isn't what's creating the higher average temperatures measured, or the record highs.

    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more positives.

    Except that the motive to test a lot more is a lot more people coming in sick with Covid-19. The epidemic was and is real. It has killed 959,130 Americans so far, and is still killing them at a rate of about 1800 per day - half the peak rate of about
    3500 per day, but still a lot of deaths.

    The planet has been warming gently since the end of the LIA. And that's good.

    It might be - if it were true. It isn't.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record#/media/File:2000+_year_global_temperature_including_Medieval_Warm_Period_and_Little_Ice_Age_-_Ed_Hawkins.svg

    The current rate of rise is a whole lot faster than than the recovery from the little ice age, and we've warmed up well beyond the peak of the medieval warm period.

    More CO2 is good too.

    Good for weeds, perhaps. Our crops have been carefully selected to do well at atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm. Other plants may out-compete them if they have access to more CO2.

    You really should stop being a credulous sucker for Anthony Watts' climate change denial propaganda.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 02:00:21 2022
    On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 9:40:54 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    But the 'record' temps are only certified for the cross-checked network stations that
    are standardized and certified. There's no number-of-sensors exreme effect for these
    stations, because the ones that don't agree are decertified.

    Once before when you made that claim, it was specific to a station in Portland with about 80 years
    in service.

    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    Which is why we quote percentages on testing. You seem to be making up possible
    confusions, but not real ones.

    The planet has been warming gently since the end of the LIA. And
    that's good.

    The 'LIA' was not global. The nonspecific 'gently' sounds good, but 'good' doesn't reflect
    increased hurricane/tornado/fire/drought/crop-failure events.

    More CO2 is good too.
    More than what? Where's the optimal level, and why is it optimal?
    CO2 acidifies rain; have you no investment in concrete
    foundations, or mortared brickwork?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@21:1/5 to David Eather on Sun Feb 20 09:52:55 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 20/02/2022 03:25, David Eather wrote:
    Which pattern does that match? You have your answer to if global warming
    is real.
    Even if global warming is real - and it probably is, a little - now
    link the trends to rise in CO2, and find that really there is no
    correlation at all.
    In o0ther words the best description of the last 5- years of climate is
    that it may have warmed slightly, but it's not linked to CO2.


    --
    “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

    H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 20 10:15:58 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 14:59:43 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
    Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    David Plowman about senile Rodent Speed's trolling:
    "Wodney is doing a lot of morphing these days. Must be even more desperate
    than usual for attention."
    MID: <59a60da1d9dave@davenoise.co.uk>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 10:47:11 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.


    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    That's innumerate. You need to quote the percentages.

    That innumeracy is surprising in an engineer. None of
    the explanations for it are complementary.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Sun Feb 20 03:12:01 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 9:47:22 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/02/22 05:40, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.
    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.
    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    That's innumerate. You need to quote the percentages.

    That innumeracy is surprising in an engineer. None of
    the explanations for it are complementary.

    Complimentary. The complementary explanation would be that John Larkin isn't an engineer - he does have an engineering degree from Tulane, but what he has said about his course work there does make it sound rather like a diploma mill.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Sun Feb 20 07:23:11 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures
    set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not
    innumerate.

    You need to insult so badly it warps your thinking.



    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    That's innumerate. You need to quote the percentages.

    Case counts - positive tests - are a big public deal that swing
    policy. I don't need to do anything that you require.


    That innumeracy is surprising in an engineer. None of
    the explanations for it are complementary.

    You? Be complementary? Or complimentary? As if.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to steve@walker-family.me.uk on Sun Feb 20 16:02:28 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 23:25:05 +0000, Steve Walker
    <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from >>>>> conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures >>>>> set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not
    innumerate.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points out in
    the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities, around
    runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due to local heat >generation and solar effects on structures and a non-proportionate
    increase could skew the data when comparing to existing records.

    High sample rates anywhere will catch extremes.


    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points >distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been made
    for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.

    Records will increase as measurements increase, and sitings change.
    Records aren't a good reflection of global trends.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 15:40:48 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 7:23:28 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not innumerate.

    Not so. Maximum-reading thermometers are not a new invention, the older stations were completely capable of noting peaks and troughs as well
    as periodic status. The 'hundred years' figure does predate airport
    readings, but not those of other facilities which were also widespread.

    Temperatures aren't volatile; except for windshifts, they move predictably up during the day, down at night, and the peaks and troughs WERE representative
    of the entire diurnal excursion.

    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    That's innumerate. You need to quote the percentages.

    Case counts - positive tests - are a big public deal that swing
    policy. I don't need to do anything that you require.

    It's a big public deal? So? The decisions we make aren't informed
    by those raw numbers, if we can digest those and increase the significance.
    I can do so. Can't you? Trump, if we can believe some of the things
    he said, couldn't.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Walker@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 23:25:05 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures >>>> set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not innumerate.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points out in
    the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities, around
    runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due to local heat generation and solar effects on structures and a non-proportionate
    increase could skew the data when comparing to existing records.

    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points
    distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been made
    for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 16:44:38 2022
    On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 4:02:45 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Records will increase as measurements increase, and sitings change.
    Records aren't a good reflection of global trends.

    Meaning, that record highs (peaks) are less important than averages? So what? The averages are climbing alarmingly, also. The 'reflection of global trends' is
    completely accessible, and there's cute color-coded visuals for the innumerate...

    Here's the world: <https://showyourstripes.info/s/globe>
    ... and it has no particular measurement-multiplicity skew.

    As to 'sitings change', that's what weather models are for; a model that fits the world can
    be fitted to old station observations or new ones, and gets consistent results, so it FILLS IN THE GAPS.
    Direct measurement of all points on earth, and centuries-of-data for single points, are amusing but
    hardly important.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Steve Walker on Mon Feb 21 01:06:23 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    Steve Walker <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote in news:suuikh$dc0$1@dont-email.me:

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a
    local library, or a decent enough library within reach, or
    those like Dave Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to
    one, despite living a mere tube ride from one of the finest
    ones in the world. Here is the evidence for all those who for
    whatever reason prefer to simply click on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the
    shit from conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high
    temperatures set every year would be rapidly dropping every
    year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp
    sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per
    year than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In
    high-rise cities and on airport runways. Of course we get
    records. That's not innumerate.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points
    out in the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities,
    around runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due
    to local heat generation and solar effects on structures and a non-proportionate increase could skew the data when comparing to
    existing records.

    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been
    made for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.
    Hmmm____________________________________^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    This part, you got spot on. The rest is gibberish.

    Readings are not skewed by local fixtures.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Walker@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Feb 21 01:08:35 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 21/02/2022 00:02, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 23:25:05 +0000, Steve Walker
    <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>>>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>>>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>>>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from >>>>>> conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures >>>>>> set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors >>>>> everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not
    innumerate.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points out in
    the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities, around
    runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due to local heat
    generation and solar effects on structures and a non-proportionate
    increase could skew the data when comparing to existing records.

    High sample rates anywhere will catch extremes.


    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points
    distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been made
    for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.

    Records will increase as measurements increase, and sitings change.
    Records aren't a good reflection of global trends.

    But the whole point is that we are basing our knowledge of climate
    change on comparison of current measurements and historic records -
    without that we cannot tell how much things have changed.

    If the current measurements are skewed by increased measurements in
    known hot spots, then the comparison is also skewed, unless it is
    corrected for.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Steve Walker on Sun Feb 20 17:28:02 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 12:08:46 PM UTC+11, Steve Walker wrote:
    On 21/02/2022 00:02, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 23:25:05 +0000, Steve Walker <st...@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:
    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
    On 20/02/22 05:40, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:

    <snip>

    Records will increase as measurements increase, and sitings change.
    Records aren't a good reflection of global trends.

    But the whole point is that we are basing our knowledge of climate
    change on comparison of current measurements and historic records -
    without that we cannot tell how much things have changed.

    If the current measurements are skewed by increased measurements in
    known hot spots, then the comparison is also skewed, unless it is
    corrected for.

    As it is.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 17:24:32 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 11:02:45 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 23:25:05 +0000, Steve Walker
    <st...@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from >>>>> conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures >>>>> set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors >>>> everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not
    innumerate.

    But the tails of the distribution are improbable.

    You have to add a lot more sensors to push the tail of the distribution even one more standard deviation away from the mean.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points out in
    the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities, around
    runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due to local heat >generation and solar effects on structures and a non-proportionate
    increase could skew the data when comparing to existing records.

    That's Anthony Watts' particular obsession. It's nuts but the climate change denial propaganda machine finds his lunacy convenient.

    High sample rates anywhere will catch extremes.

    But nothing all that far way from the mean.

    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points >distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been made
    for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.

    Records will increase as measurements increase, and sitings change.
    Records aren't a good reflection of global trends.

    True, but they make for great newspaper headlines.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Feb 20 17:17:12 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 2:23:28 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREM...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave >>>> Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the shit from
    conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high temperatures >>> set every year would be rapidly dropping every year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp sensors
    everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per year
    than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In high-rise
    cities and on airport runways. Of course we get records. That's not innumerate.

    The temperature sensors are going to record a range of temperatures. It's going to be a Gaussian distribution about the average temperature.

    The tails on either side of the mean don't extend to infinity, Not grasping what this means is innumerate.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation

    You need to insult so badly it warps your thinking.

    If you don't know what you are talking about, your errors have to be corrected. This is - incidentally - insulting, but the proper reaction isn't feeling insulted but rather learnng a bit more about the subject you misunderstood.

    It's like covid case counts. Test a lot more and get a lot more
    positives.

    That's innumerate. You need to quote the percentages.

    Case counts - positive tests - are a big public deal that swings policy.

    If you had been paying attention you would have noticed that Covid-19 statistics report both the raw number of people actually infected, and also the proportion of tests that come out positive. The proportion of positive results should be less than 5% -
    you should be test enough people that only one in twenty are actually sick - to have reasonable confidence that you are reporting the incidence in the population. If the number of positive results gets higher than 5%, there's a risk that there's an
    appreciable population of sick people in the community that your tests aren't picking up. This is what drives the testing numbers - not some idiot desire to paint the epidemic as worse than it is.

    I don't need to do anything that you require.

    John Larkin is totally satisfied with himself, just the way he is. That's a failure of judgement. If he went in for some minor self-improvement he'd have more reason to be satisfied, and might even get better at judging how he ought to react to well-
    informed criticism.

    That innumeracy is surprising in an engineer. None of
    the explanations for it are complementary.

    You? Be complementary? Or complimentary? As if.

    Post something that is well-informed, and it might happen. The first event is a lot more improbable than the second.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Steve Walker on Mon Feb 21 01:34:12 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    Steve Walker <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote in news:suuomk$e5o$1 @dont-email.me:

    If the current measurements are skewed by increased measurements in
    known hot spots, then the comparison is also skewed, unless it is
    corrected for.


    This is the stupid part of your "argument". More like flat Earth
    idiot physics. You grasp of this is skewed by the local cold spots
    between your ears.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Walker@21:1/5 to DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc on Mon Feb 21 17:30:27 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 21/02/2022 01:34, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
    Steve Walker <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote in news:suuomk$e5o$1 @dont-email.me:

    If the current measurements are skewed by increased measurements in
    known hot spots, then the comparison is also skewed, unless it is
    corrected for.


    This is the stupid part of your "argument". More like flat Earth
    idiot physics. You grasp of this is skewed by the local cold spots
    between your ears.

    It is not stupid. It is simple maths. If you have 90 sensors out in the countryside and 10 in the city and the city ones are known to show
    higher temperatures (a Heat Island effect), then adding 10 more in the
    city and 10 more in the countryside will cause the average to rise, even
    if the temperatures don't change.

    Start with 10 in the city (reading an average of 22°C and 90 in the countryside (reading an average of 20°C) and you have an average of 22.2°C.

    Add 10 in the city and 10 in the countryside and the average (assuming
    nothing else changes) becomes 20.33 °C

    As I've said, the figures may be corrected for this, but do we know? How certain are we that the correction is itself correct?

    Similarly, we are told that satellite temperature mapping is highly
    accurate, but again we are comparing to figures from before such
    accuracy was available. Can we be sure that the period that such
    detailed mapping has been available for is long enough to cover any
    normal fluctuations that were there, but not noticeable in pre-satellite figures? To what level of certainty?

    I'm not arguing that the figures and comparisons are wrong, only that
    there is scope for skewing of the figures ... in either direction.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Walker@21:1/5 to DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc on Mon Feb 21 17:32:16 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 21/02/2022 01:06, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
    Steve Walker <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote in news:suuikh$dc0$1@dont-email.me:

    On 20/02/2022 15:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:47:11 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 20/02/22 05:40, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:25:23 +1000, David Eather
    <eatREMOVEher@tpg.com.au> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 11:36 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a
    local library, or a decent enough library within reach, or
    those like Dave Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to
    one, despite living a mere tube ride from one of the finest
    ones in the world. Here is the evidence for all those who for
    whatever reason prefer to simply click on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)






    FFS do some math and stop with the conspiracy shit and the
    shit from conspiracy web sites.

    1.If the world was cooling then the number of record high
    temperatures set every year would be rapidly dropping every
    year.

    You can get more record temps if you have way more 24/7 temp
    sensors everywhere than we used to. Which we sure do.

    That's innumerate. You also need to quote the probability
    of higher temperatures, and that is highly non-linear.

    We are taking roughly a million more temperature data points per
    year than we did a hundred years ago. In a lot more places. In
    high-rise cities and on airport runways. Of course we get
    records. That's not innumerate.

    The only question there is, have the number of temperature points
    out in the countryside increased in proportion to those in cities,
    around runways, etc.? All of which are known to be hot spots due
    to local heat generation and solar effects on structures and a
    non-proportionate increase could skew the data when comparing to
    existing records.

    It may well be that there is no problem and that either the points
    distribution has increased in proportion or corrections have been
    made for a disproportionate increase, but I have no idea.
    Hmmm____________________________________^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    This part, you got spot on. The rest is gibberish.

    Readings are not skewed by local fixtures.

    Have you never heard of Heat Islands? Towns and cities are known to be typically 2 to 3 °C warmer than the countryside. The readings of sensors
    will therefore be affected by their location.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to Steve Walker on Mon Feb 21 12:13:38 2022
    On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:30:38 AM UTC-8, Steve Walker wrote:

    It is not stupid. It is simple maths. If you have 90 sensors out in the countryside and 10 in the city and the city ones are known to show
    higher temperatures (a Heat Island effect), then adding 10 more in the
    city and 10 more in the countryside will cause the average to rise, even
    if the temperatures don't change.

    Yes, of course that IS stupid. Averages are weighted. No matter how many stations are in a square mile, that square mile gets ONE vote, just like every other
    square mile. Maybe the precision of a city's 'heat island' gets better because
    of the multiple samples, but its weight in the average is less than the one sensor in a hundred square miles of tundra: that one sensor in the tundra gets a hundred votes, effectively.

    Heat island or not, the city deserves its vote. Leaving out the city for some frivolous reason, would not be consistent with a true average.

    Average of measurements is not done by arbitrary list-of-numbers processing like one learns in elementary school.

    As I've said, the figures may be corrected for this, but do we know? How certain are we that the correction is itself correct?

    We can be uninformed, true. The climate warming effect has been an
    active topic since the 1970s, well-studied and confirmed in the early 1990s, and no one doing weather/climate modeling and averages is uninformed today.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fredxx@21:1/5 to Cursitor Doom on Sun Feb 27 00:58:55 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    Well done in providing the data you were relying on.

    Some notes:
    1) The Smog you mention wasn't down to CO2, but with the volatile
    components of burning coal. Hence only smokeless coal could be burnt in
    many areas. We haven't seen smogs since.
    2) It is difficult to know whether figures represent by way of volume or
    mass. It can be confusing when it comes to partial pressures, % volume
    and % mass. CO2 is heavier than the major components of air. I assume
    numbers are by volume.
    3) Most of the numbers actually agree with convention measurements:

    https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_A_scz8Y6sCzTd7i3vVgemDn9D2qgQTvHub_WbT5avHI.webp

    4) Your sources:
    America 1960: 0.03% (Can rise to 0.06% in a subway)
    Britannica 2009: 0.038%
    Chambers 1860: 0.04% (0.06 by weight)
    Chambers 1959: Can't see a figure.
    Everymans 1910: 0.04%
    Lavoisier 1: Can't see a figure.
    Lavoisier 2: Can't see a figure.
    New Britannica 1985: 0.03%
    Oldhams Modern 1961: 0.03%

    5) It is well known that low-level CO2 levels can be much higher.
    Without further details I suspect the older measurements were taken in laboratories in populated areas.

    6) What is notable that none of these provide error margins and where
    the samples were taken. If I see 0.03% I take the error margins to be
    +/-0.01% The Britannica 2009 seems to be in agreement with most records.
    The lack of details and references for the above measurements cause me
    to take the numbers as approximations, so consistent with known data
    like that above.

    7) Science has moved on a long way, in terms of measurement details and
    aspects like Confirmation Bias.

    My two-penny's worth.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Fredxx on Sat Feb 26 17:36:45 2022
    On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 11:59:06 AM UTC+11, Fredxx wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    Well done in providing the data you were relying on.

    Less well done in choosing that particular sample of antiquated and inadequate data to rely on. Cursitor Doom seems to have made up whatever it is he uses instead of a mind and only then gone out of his way to find "data" that he imagines will support
    his opinion.

    <snipped the perfectly correct objections to the data - such as it is. I've made similar points in the past, but Cursitor Doom has his preferred delusions and isn't going to let anything change his mind>

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cursitor Doom@21:1/5 to Fredxx on Sun Mar 20 11:35:07 2022
    XPost: uk.d-i-y, uk.legal

    On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 00:58:55 +0000, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere
    tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click
    on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)

    Well done in providing the data you were relying on.

    Some notes:
    1) The Smog you mention wasn't down to CO2, but with the volatile
    components of burning coal. Hence only smokeless coal could be burnt in
    many areas. We haven't seen smogs since.
    2) It is difficult to know whether figures represent by way of volume or >mass. It can be confusing when it comes to partial pressures, % volume
    and % mass. CO2 is heavier than the major components of air. I assume
    numbers are by volume.
    3) Most of the numbers actually agree with convention measurements:

    https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_A_scz8Y6sCzTd7i3vVgemDn9D2qgQTvHub_WbT5avHI.webp

    4) Your sources:
    America 1960: 0.03% (Can rise to 0.06% in a subway)
    Britannica 2009: 0.038%
    Chambers 1860: 0.04% (0.06 by weight)
    Chambers 1959: Can't see a figure.

    https://disk.yandex.com/d/fz3HkPWpK-qlWw/CO2%20DATA%20FOR%20THE%20SIGHT-IMPARED/chambers%201959.JPG


    Everymans 1910: 0.04%
    Lavoisier 1: Can't see a figure.
    Lavoisier 2: Can't see a figure.

    The Lavoisier reference was simply to show that highly precise
    methodologies for the measurement of atmospheric gases had been around
    since the 1700s. It was just a suggested starting point for anyone
    interested in the historical development of quantitative analysis of
    gases.

    New Britannica 1985: 0.03%
    Oldhams Modern 1961: 0.03%

    5) It is well known that low-level CO2 levels can be much higher.
    Without further details I suspect the older measurements were taken in >laboratories in populated areas.

    6) What is notable that none of these provide error margins and where
    the samples were taken. If I see 0.03% I take the error margins to be >+/-0.01% The Britannica 2009 seems to be in agreement with most records.
    The lack of details and references for the above measurements cause me
    to take the numbers as approximations, so consistent with known data
    like that above.

    7) Science has moved on a long way, in terms of measurement details and >aspects like Confirmation Bias.

    My two-penny's worth.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From M Kfivethousand@21:1/5 to The Natural Philosopher on Sun Mar 20 13:02:18 2022
    On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 8:40:10 AM UTC-6, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:30, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 14:12:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 16/02/2022 13:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
    Gentlemen,

    I *finally* got around to it. For those who don't have a local
    library, or a decent enough library within reach, or those like Dave
    Plowman who are just too bone idle to go to one, despite living a mere >>> tube ride from one of the finest ones in the world. Here is the
    evidence for all those who for whatever reason prefer to simply click >>> on a link:

    https://tinyurl.com/2p8eun5u

    There you go: all the leg-work done for you. :-)





    Sadly me old mucker, I had as a child an copy of an encyclopedia series >> that detailed the piltdown man or 'missing link' as a clearly
    established fact.

    I am afraid that the penchant of scholars and academics to copy 'facts' >> from each other was no less prevalent then than it is today.

    Especially when compiling encyclopedias.

    My own encounter with this was in a totally obscure Wiki article about a >> German WWII aircraft engine, where the power expressed in kW only
    matched the power expressed in bhp if two digits were transposed.

    I altered them, The original author altered them back citing numerous
    references, all of which contained the same obvious typo.

    I gave up.

    In short I admire your scholarship, but it proves sadly nothing more
    than the penchant for plagiarism that pervades the scholastic mind.

    Check out any book on the dark ages before the 1950s. Compare with books >> after that where scientific archaeology reveals something utterly different.

    Yes, and tomorrow's books on the Dark Ages will show the original
    ancient Britons were actually sub-saharan Africans who were
    exterminated by the Anglo Saxons.
    No thanks, NP, I'll stick with the *old* pre-Agenda books!
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a bit'.


    Or you changed what you eat

    House finches redness is related to diet

    mk5000

    “Night flight to San Francisco; chase the moon across America. God, it’s been years since I was on a plane. When we hit 35,000 feet we’ll have reached the tropopause, the great belt of calm air, as close as I’ll ever get to the ozone. I dreamed
    we were there. ==― Tony Kushner, Perestroika

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From M Kfivethousand@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sun Mar 20 13:04:44 2022
    On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 10:27:41 AM UTC-6, David Brown wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 16:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 1:47:43 AM UTC+11, newshound
    wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Not exactly. Europeans mostly have a few Neanderthal genes, and sub-Saharan Africans don't. Further east you see Denisovian genes
    too.

    And where do you think those Neanderthals and Denisovian, or their ancestors, came from?

    I cannot tell

    mk5000

    “The world of literature has everything in it, and it refuses to leave anything out. I have read like a man on fire my whole life because the
    genius of English teachers touched me with the dazzling beauty of language.
    ― Pat Conroy

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From M Kfivethousand@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Sun Mar 20 13:08:58 2022
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 6:38:35 AM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 10:36:25 PM UTC+11, David Brown wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and
    got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.

    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As different
    parts of the populations became more isolated in different regions of
    the world, they evolved and we got Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to
    intermixing in different parts of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.
    Sub-Saharan African great apes. I rather doubt that a modern human could interbreed with Homo Erectus. The moderately diverse great apes that started moving out of Africa two million years ago are clearly our near ancestors, but it's a long stretch to
    call them sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes would be fine. The Natural Philosopher seems to be "natural" in the Shakespearean sense of being under-educated.
    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are all
    still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line of ancestry.
    Sub-Saharan great apes, and our ancestors were a rather small subset of them.

    https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-floresiensis



    There’s no banana for scale, but it just looks too big to me to be a finch. It looks robin sized to me.

    mk5000


    To build a tomb which, since I am not read,
    Suffers the stone’s mortality instead;
    Which, by the common iconographies
    Of simple visual ease,
    Usurps the place of the complexities--The Poet Orders His Tomb

    By Edgar Bowers

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From M Kfivethousand@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sun Mar 20 13:15:32 2022
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 5:24:34 AM UTC-6, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/02/2022 05:35, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 2:50:00 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
    David Brown <david...@hesbynett.no> wrote in
    news:sulbvd$gis$1...@dont-email.me:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural
    Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that
    is...


    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk
    and got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.


    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move
    out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As
    different parts of the populations became more isolated in
    different regions of the world, they evolved and we got
    Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more
    - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations
    of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to intermixing in different parts
    of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are
    nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.

    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from
    Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are
    all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line
    of ancestry.

    No... Not from same roots.

    H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens are two separate species.

    This is debatable. They clearly could interbreed with homo sapiens and the off-spring were clearly fertile, which nominally makes us both members of same species.
    That depends on your perspective. There are loads of quite radically different plant species that will hybridise easily and certain F1
    hybrids can have remarkable properties. It even depends critically on
    which is the egg donor and which is the pollen donor. There is a naming convention for such hybrids and the multiple crossing to concentrate the
    most desirable traits for houseplants gets very complicated.

    https://sgplants.com/blogs/news/echeveria-gibbiflora-hybrids-a-short-history

    If you look closely you can see a very faint patch of red

    That is fairly characteristic of house finches

    Are they feeding this succulent the same thing that finches eat

    mk5000

    Smelly Cat, Smelly Cat,
    What are they feeding you?
    Smelly Cat, Smelly Cat
    You're getting fat --Phoebe Buffay

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From m syadoz@21:1/5 to M Kfivethousand on Sun Mar 20 14:26:05 2022
    On Sunday, March 20, 2022 at 3:09:02 PM UTC-5, M Kfivethousand wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 6:38:35 AM UTC-6, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 10:36:25 PM UTC+11, David Brown wrote:
    On 17/02/2022 10:56, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:51:30 PM UTC+11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote:
    On 16/02/2022 14:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Dahling we is *all* sub Saharan Africans, we is just 'faded a
    bit'.

    Apart from the odd admix of Neanderthal and Denisovian that is... >>>

    They were also sub Saharan Africans. They just went for a walk and
    got lost .

    They weren't. Neanderthals don't ever seem to have shown up in
    Africa. Denisovians didn't even get as close as Israel.

    You are talking about different things here.

    According to current best hypotheses, the first humanoids to move out of Africa were Homo Erectus, around 2 million years ago. As different
    parts of the populations became more isolated in different regions of the world, they evolved and we got Neanderthals in Europe, Denisovans in Asia, and no doubt many more - fossil remains never give a complete picture. Later migrations of Homo Sapiens from Africa led to
    intermixing in different parts of the world.

    The Neanderthals were never (AFAWK) in Africa. But they are nonetheless descendants of sub-Saharan Africans.
    Sub-Saharan African great apes. I rather doubt that a modern human could interbreed with Homo Erectus. The moderately diverse great apes that started moving out of Africa two million years ago are clearly our near ancestors, but it's a long stretch
    to call them sub-Saharan Africans.

    Sub-Saharan African great apes would be fine. The Natural Philosopher seems to be "natural" in the Shakespearean sense of being under-educated.
    Europeans typically have something like 1 - 5% of their genes from Neanderthals, and Asians have a mix from Denisovians. But we are all still descended from sub-Saharan Africans, though every line of ancestry.
    Sub-Saharan great apes, and our ancestors were a rather small subset of them.

    https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-floresiensis



    There’s no banana for scale,

    Know your meme

    https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/banana-for-scale

    but it just looks too big to me to be a finch.
    It looks robin sized to me.

    mk5000


    To build a tomb which, since I am not read,
    Suffers the stone’s mortality instead;
    Which, by the common iconographies
    Of simple visual ease,
    Usurps the place of the complexities--The Poet Orders His Tomb

    By Edgar Bowers

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Thu Apr 14 20:18:38 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 04:06:57 +1000, Jock, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Tim+ about trolling Rodent Speed:
    He is by far the most persistent troll who seems to be able to get under the skin of folk who really should know better. Since when did arguing with a
    troll ever achieve anything (beyond giving the troll pleasure)?
    MID: <1421057667.659518815.743467.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Thu Apr 14 23:03:19 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 06:25:49 +1000, Jock, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
    "Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
    MID: <g4t0jtFrknaU1@mid.individual.net>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 15 00:22:02 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:19:17 +1000, Jock, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Bod addressing abnormal senile quarreller Rodent Speed:
    "Do you practice arguing with yourself in an empty room?"
    MID: <g4ihlaFh5p5U2@mid.individual.net>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 16 21:39:49 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Sun, 17 Apr 2022 05:05:09 +1000, Jock, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    williamwright addressing Rodent Speed:
    "You are an insecure blathermouth with an inferiority complex."
    MID: <j08dicFcuptU1@mid.individual.net>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 16 23:25:59 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Sun, 17 Apr 2022 06:54:53 +1000, Jock, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Thu Apr 21 19:39:38 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 03:36:28 +1000, %%, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 87-year-old senile Australian
    cretin's pathological trolling: https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 24 20:37:01 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 04:09:53 +1000, %%, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 87-year-old senile Australian
    cretin's pathological trolling: https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peeler@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 24 21:45:36 2022
    XPost: alt.home.repair, uk.d-i-y

    On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:25:37 +1000, %%, better known as cantankerous
    trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

    <FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

    --
    dennis@home to senile know-it-all Rodent Speed:
    "You really should stop commenting on things you know nothing about." Message-ID: <pCVTC.283711$%L2.214599@fx40.am4>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)