In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:

I can't say fairer than that, now can I?

You didn't ask Dubya, didya?

No, but he clearly learnt his science from the same source.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
martin wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 10:22:36 +0100, "michael adams"
wrote:
"martin" wrote in message
. ..

Call me a naive crackpot, but I'd chose Nick in preference to any
journalist.

Or perhaps yourself and your Crackpot Master McLaren will now want
to accuse the BBC of lying, and putting words in people's mouths
as well ?

The BBC quite frequently get things wrong, especially technical and
scientific subjects. For every expert with an opinion on weather
trends there are 10 other experts with differing opinions.

Actually, the REAL experts tend to have ten opinions each, and simplify
to one only when talking to journalists and lecturing to undergraduates :-)

I remember when "the father of climatology" was forecasting that
another ice age was imminent.

Yup. I remember that, too.

That was, indeed, an aspect of the cyclemania that I was referring to.

It is only about 50 years since statisticians realised that most data
that appears to follow cycles actually doesn't, because the feedback
effects are of the sort that do not create regular or predictable
patterns. And the belief in cycles is still widespread in many
sciences, despite decades of the best people pointing out that the
data are clearly incompatible with a true cyclic model.

Interestingly, one of the things that keeps cyclemania alive is the
deficiency of the English language in not having a term for the sort
of irregular variation caused by non-cyclic feedback effects. The
nearest term is, indeed, "cycle" but that immediately gets people
thinking in terms of regular, predictable variation. Think of this
the next time anyone talks about the economy ....


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
michael adams wrote:


Mclaren wasn't claiming any expert was wrong.

He was claiming the reporter was lying.

Just as you now seem to be claiming the BBC is lying, in deliberately
mis-quoting Professor Mark Saunders.

Nonsense. We are both stating that the reporter is likely to have
got confused, by not understanding the situation in enough depth,
and so produces a misleading or actually incorrect statement. This
has happened to both me and most of my colleagues who have been
'quoted' in the press.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

michael adams wrote:
[...]
Although lying about people seems a particular speciality of
yours.

As it is with most Crackpots of course.

More especially once they start to feel the heat.
[...]

Michael, I can't help wondering why you use such an aggressive style
in discussion. It's awfully off-putting. I seem to remember having
been on the wrong end of it myself on one occasion (perhaps I started
it: I really can't remember). Surely if you have the evidence and
present it clearly, it will speak for itself: the issue is far too
interesting to get emotional about. Nick gets distinctly blunt at
times, but ratcheting up isn't the way to deal with it.

--
Mike.

It seems clear that the reason for this year's heat wave is the lack of
particulate matter in the atmosphere blocking out the solar radiation.

What needs to be done is to encourage pollution worldwide to block out the
bad radiation so we can cool down the planet just a little!!!!

Duby's hare-brained solution to the problem almost seems to make sense. We
need to burn a lot more coal!!!


"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:

I can't say fairer than that, now can I?

You didn't ask Dubya, didya?

No, but he clearly learnt his science from the same source.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:

So if the drought trends aren't decribing 'cycles' precisely what are
they describing ?

Trends, perhaps?

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (WaltA) contains these words:
Variously it was written:
I could also add that the observations from previous
centuries are quite good enough in quality to debunk the theory
that there is a single predominant cycle.

Quite. I favour Velocette, but others like Triumph...

I read on teletext today that some ladies are cycling around england on
Harley-Davidson bikes.

I wasn't aware that they made bicycles!

I bet they have some thised thighs if they pedal them.

I wasn't aware that they made bikes !
( motorised armchairs, more like)
mallards

Bring back my trusty Comet and Rapide ,, I wish,,,,sigh,,,

Ah. Now you're talking. I hanker. (Though my Shadow was all packed with
Lightning internals...)

PS Those ladies must have strong legs then, not to mention the thighs
and,,,

swoon

The message
from martin contains these words:

Quite. I favour Velocette, but others like Triumph...

when in need of support?

I like the thud of the Longstroke MSS, every other lamp post. I like the
friskiness of the KTT, and the silent creep-uppedness of the LE -
amongst other things.

I don't need a walking-frame YET, TYVM.

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:
In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:

I can't say fairer than that, now can I?

(Global warming)

You didn't ask Dubya, didya?

No, but he clearly learnt his science from the same source.

I rather think he learnt it from the same source as his thinking on
foreign policy, and his knowledge of psychology.

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

Interestingly, one of the things that keeps cyclemania alive is the
deficiency of the English language in not having a term for the sort
of irregular variation caused by non-cyclic feedback effects. The
nearest term is, indeed, "cycle" but that immediately gets people
thinking in terms of regular, predictable variation. Think of this
the next time anyone talks about the economy ....

'Fluctuations' instead of 'cycles'?

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:
"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:

I can't say fairer than that, now can I?

You didn't ask Dubya, didya?

No, but he clearly learnt his science from the same source.


Attempting to discredit scientists is more your own, and Bush's
(advisors) speciality than mine, I'd have thought.

Although lying about people seems a particular speciality of
yours.

As it is with most Crackpots of course.

More especially once they start to feel the heat.

The only evidence in support of your increasingly hysterical replies
rests in your own posts - nowhere else.

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

The message
from "michael adams" contains these words:
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
...

Michael, I can't help wondering why you use such an aggressive style
in discussion. It's awfully off-putting.

....

Then don't read my posts.

It really is as simple as that, isn't it?

If you want a forum which is run solely to suit your own
personal tastes Mr Lyle, then I can only suggest you start
up your own moderated chat board.

It isn't my function in life to provide you personally
with either entertainment or information.

You seem to be succeeding admirably in the former, though failing rather
dismally regarding the latter. Perhaps it's a good thing that it isn't
your function in life.

More especially
when you're not paying me anything to do so. And I find it
rather presumptuous on your part to assume otherwise.

I don't remember anyone assuming that you were being paid for your
outpourings.

....

I seem to remember having
been on the wrong end of it myself on one occasion (perhaps I started
it: I really can't remember). Surely if you have the evidence and
present it clearly, it will speak for itself: the issue is far too
interesting to get emotional about. Nick gets distinctly blunt at
times, but ratcheting up isn't the way to deal with it.

--
Mike.


....

If I ever require advice on how to conduct myself on NewsGroups Mr Lyle,
or in life generaly for that matter, you can rest assured that the first
person who I'll turn to for advice, will be somebody who clearly believes
themselves especially qualified to offer advice on such subjects,
such as yourself.

Ah, good. I must say that I approve of your rating Mike as knowing how
to conduct himself in newsgroups, for I totally agree there.

Book of Common Prayer

Hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them.

/Prayer

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

Interestingly, one of the things that keeps cyclemania alive is the
deficiency of the English language in not having a term for the sort
of irregular variation caused by non-cyclic feedback effects. The
nearest term is, indeed, "cycle" but that immediately gets people
thinking in terms of regular, predictable variation. Think of this
the next time anyone talks about the economy ....

'Fluctuations' instead of 'cycles'?

Hang on. The reference was from the Guardian. Do you honestly
think that they could have spelled 'fluctuations' the same way
twice, let alone correctly?

But, yes, it is an accurate term. It is very generic, unfortunately,
and doesn't identify the particular class of variation that is
being referred to here.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

'Fluctuations' instead of 'cycles'?

Hang on. The reference was from the Guardian. Do you honestly
think that they could have spelled 'fluctuations' the same way
twice, let alone correctly?

I stans collected.

But, yes, it is an accurate term. It is very generic, unfortunately,
and doesn't identify the particular class of variation that is
being referred to here.

Perhaps we should coin a new word?

I'll kick off with 'fluctuatours' and 'circumfluctuations'.

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:
The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

Interestingly, one of the things that keeps cyclemania alive is
the
deficiency of the English language in not having a term for the
sort
of irregular variation caused by non-cyclic feedback effects.
The
nearest term is, indeed, "cycle" but that immediately gets people
thinking in terms of regular, predictable variation. Think of
this
the next time anyone talks about the economy ....

'Fluctuations' instead of 'cycles'?

Hang on. The reference was from the Guardian. Do you honestly
think that they could have spelled 'fluctuations' the same way
twice, let alone correctly?

But, yes, it is an accurate term. It is very generic,
unfortunately,
and doesn't identify the particular class of variation that is
being referred to here.

And the consensus on climate change has built to a level where, most
unfortunately, one has to start taking into consideration the
political or paymaster issues relevant to those relatively few who
pop up and tell us there's nothing to worry about. No doubt the
mechanisms and even the data of the whole thing are very complex and
uncertain, and many specific predictions will turn out to be wrong:
this isn't something nice and simple like nuclear physics. But, oh
boy, if somebody tells me it doesn't matter if the North Pole has
melted, I want to see the cores he's examined to show how often it's
happened in the past, and I want to know who's paying him.

--
Mike.