Search results

Can you show a corelation between climate and beetle population?

Spotted something on the news while Les was watching eyelid movies. Apparently some guys are going to be bashing protons in that big accelerator in Switzerland again. This time they're going to see if they can find monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles Detected In A Real Magnet For The First Time This...

Well, one never knows about beavers, though.

So? The idea of vaccines is prevention, not eradication.

Yeah, HPV vaccine doesn't prevent cervical cancer, tetanus shot doesn't prevent tetanus, diphtheria shots, etc. none of which prevent anything ..... and the Easter Bunny can really lay eggs, too.

What part of this didn't you understand? [B]

You've said that before a few times. Look, all I am saying is that the beetle is not a reliable indicator of climate change. There's been population explosions before and the beetle is not limited to northern BC and never has been.

Yup. So like I said, cold isn't a factor. What is left that controls the beetle is either lack of food or fire. The beetle population is moving outward from its normal habitat because of food. It has nothing to do with warm climate. Before warming climates, the beetle survived cold winters by...

Like I said before, cold isn't a factor. So I'd bet that the factor remaining is food. And that has little to do with climate change in the short term..

All he has is historical evidence to back him up. Humans haven't been around long enough to be certain about the extent of AGW, so there is nothing to compare AGW with except former events. That is hardly a solid basis for the claim that we haven't impacted climate significantly. So far, we've...

I guess so. Anything else is lost on you. Delusions again? Someone schooled me? Must have been Tonnington, you don't have the chalk let alone the blackboard. &yaaaaaaaaaaaaawns*

You did. If you had told us you have senile dementia we could make allowances for you, you know. Still waiting for you to post something worth reading. Till then, your posts are only worth a cursory glance, And you still haven't shown where human interference is insignificant. You think so? So...

According to you. *shrugs* I said that a long time ago. Big deal. lmao Jam it up your kumquat already, chica. :roll: But it's all natural and anthropological causes are negligible; or to put it in your terms "Insignificant". blah blah blah...... So? You still think I can make my hair grow. lmao...

Tapioca starch works nicely as a thickener. Also instant mashed potatoes. Sometimes I add grated cheese to scalloped spuds, too, besides the bacon; kind of like a scalloped spuds au gratin. When I don't add cheese I sprinkle the top with parsley and cayenne.

lmao After Les already stated that climatology is a relatively young science and even the experts cannot agree on various aspects of it, I think the interested people here got the idea. And in spite of even the experts not agreeing, certain people, yourself included, state unequivocally that its...

Quit being obtuse and off-topic. It was an example.

Good point. All I've seen so far from Slim is that GW is part of a natural cycle and the only evidence shown has been because it has been that way in the past. Well, sorry, but I used to have long hair in the past. That doesn't mean it is long now.

It's just natural fluctuations.

Yeah ... that's a long winded version of what I said.

GW is real, AGW is the thing up for debate.