The surge

William Asher said:

I always thought beer nuts was a condition men got from drinking too much
beer.

LIVEDRUNKARDS beware.

Howard Kveck said:

Don't 'wanton ways' go along with general dissolution and lack of moral character?

Only if done right and with perseverance.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

email hidden said:

Beer nuts, of course, are the seeds from which beer trees
grow.

This is the kind of logic that caused me so much disappointment when I
finally found an alewive.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Curtis L. Russell said:

email hidden said:

Beer nuts, of course, are the seeds from which beer trees
grow.

This is the kind of logic that caused me so much disappointment when I
finally found an alewive.

I can only imagine what you must have felt on nailing your first cunner.

--
Bill Asher

Donald Munro said:

William Asher said:

I always thought beer nuts was a condition men got from drinking too
much beer.

LIVEDRUNKARDS beware.

You do not want to know about pork rinds.

--
Bill Asher

Quoted message said:

William Asher said:

I will defer to your expertise on Norse/Inuit cuisine. I've always thought
edamame were invented so that upper middle class couples could feed them to
their children instead of Cheetos.

That could be, although they do have a use as a salty
appetizer in Japanese restaurants to induce you to drink
more Sapporo (why my friend called them Japanese beer nuts).

Beer nuts, of course, are the seeds from which beer trees
grow.

The Norse in Greenland died because they were stupid. How else would
you wind up in Greenland? Ask someone in the Air Force how you wind
up in Greenland. It was the same for the Norse.

If they were smart they'd have opened up Google Earth and done a
'Fly To' to here: N44 08'11.40" E4 48'33.28" , gotten a table
next to the fountain, and ordered this:
http://www.cvccbike.com/food/andouillette-au-vin-blanc.jpg

While pondering the Theatre Antique:
http://www.cvccbike.com/food/theatre-antique.jpg

Then they wouldn't have starved. Dummies.

Bob Schwartz

Bob Schwartz said:

The Norse in Greenland died because they were stupid. How else would
you wind up in Greenland? Ask someone in the Air Force how you wind
up in Greenland. It was the same for the Norse.

They picked the wrong service speciality when they enlisted?

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

On Feb 12, 12:16 pm, Bob Schwartz <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The Norse in Greenland died because they were stupid. How else would
you wind up in Greenland? Ask someone in the Air Force how you wind
up in Greenland. It was the same for the Norse.

The Norse dented the CO's car while parking it for him
outside the officers' club?

Actually, come to think of it, this is more or less
why Erik the Red had to take it on the lam from Iceland
and colonize Greenland (well, he killed some people
instead of denting the CO's car, but that was pretty
much the Norse equivalent).

Quoted message said:

If they were smart they'd have opened up Google Earth and done a
'Fly To' to here: N44 08'11.40" E4 48'33.28" , gotten a table
next to the fountain, and ordered this:
http://www.cvccbike.com/food/andouillette-au-vin-blanc.jpg

While pondering the Theatre Antique:
http://www.cvccbike.com/food/theatre-antique.jpg

Then they wouldn't have starved. Dummies.

The smart Norse were busy pillaging Pays d'Andouillette
while the dumb Norse were settling Greenland, so in that
sense you are right. The dumb Norse tried to settle
Newfoundland (Vinland), which had wine just like Pays
d'Andouillette, so they weren't _that_ dumb, but
unfortunately they were driven away by violent
encounters with Native American Newfies.

Those Newfies appear to have been better at scaring off
Vikings (not a peaceful bunch themselves) than were
the French, which perhaps explains the bad reputation
of the French army but not why Canadians are so
passive-aggressively polite these days.

Ben
RBR History Department

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich' cyclintom@yahoo. com said:

"Howard Kveck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich' cyclintom@yahoo. com said:

So you actually made up that wording. Sort of like your arguments for
anthropomorphic global warming.

Trying to evade the point by complaining that he used a word that you
didn't, aren't you? While it's true that you didn't use the word "scum" it's
plenty obvious from the tone of the comments you make about others in here who
disagree with youthat you must think they're scum (or whatever word you choose
that has equivalent meaning).

No Howard, I don't think that Bill is scum. He is a little man following his
leaders.

If there is anyone in here who exhibits a greater amount of "following his
leaders" than you, Tom, all of our heads would explode.

Quoted message said:

On the other hand, you are scum.

(shrug...)

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
[stuff on digital filters snipped]

What do you do when the data aren't equi-spaced?

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
[stuff on digital filters snipped]

What do you do when the data aren't equi-spaced?

Are you insinuating that yearly average global temperatures are not equally
spaced?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece

"When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming
is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works. We
were treated to another dose of it recently when the experts of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued the Summary for
Policymakers that puts the political spin on an unfinished scientific
dossier on climate change due for publication in a few months' time. They
declared that most of the rise in temperatures since the mid-20th century is
very likely due to man-made greenhouse gases."

"Twenty years ago, climate research became politicised in favour of one
particular hypothesis, which redefined the subject as the study of the
effect of greenhouse gases. As a result, the rebellious spirits essential
for innovative and trustworthy science are greeted with impediments to their
research careers. And while the media usually find mavericks at least
entertaining, in this case they often imagine that anyone who doubts the
hypothesis of man-made global warming must be in the pay of the oil
companies. As a result, some key discoveries in climate research go almost
unreported."

The problem is that people like Chung support the intentional biasing of
data to fit their political agenda.

Tom Kunich said:

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

What do you do when the data aren't equi-spaced?

Are you insinuating that yearly average global temperatures are not
equally spaced?

Not at all. I was simply pointing out that the Hamming stuff that Greg
cut-and-pasted had a particular point of view about the regularity of data
(and that point of view is often an engineer's).

But as long as I have your attention, what was your "six point polynomial"
and why did you choose six as opposed to any other number?

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

What do you do when the data aren't equi-spaced?

Are you insinuating that yearly average global temperatures are not
equally spaced?

Not at all. I was simply pointing out that the Hamming stuff that Greg
cut-and-pasted had a particular point of view about the regularity of data
(and that point of view is often an engineer's).

But as long as I have your attention, what was your "six point polynomial"
and why did you choose six as opposed to any other number?

Could it be because I didn't have to run a Matlab simulation - only use the
largest possible filter available in Excel?

Or would that be too complicated for you guys to figure out?

"SLAVE of THE STATE" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I think the end points are the stickler. My point was simply that
both domains should be looked at -- I think that would help in
choosing a filter. You think not?

I think that if you ignore all the things that are known to correlate
with global temperature and are aperiodic in nature, such as ENSO, then
any filtering you do in order to try to find trends in the short-term
temperature record is the intellectual equivalent of a pud pulling party.
The current flattening out of global temperature, as I said before, is
probably because we've been in La Nina conditions for 2004-2005. El Nino
was officially declared a month or so ago, and global temperatures will
go up next year (or maybe this year, there's a lag between El Nino and
temperature but I can't remember if it's from the "official" start or
when then Southern Oscillation index reverses, which is a months ahead of
the official start). Or something like that anyway.

--
Bill Asher

William Asher said:

"SLAVE of THE STATE" <[email hidden]> wrote innews:[email hidden]:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I think the end points are the stickler. My point was simply that
both domains should be looked at -- I think that would help in
choosing a filter. You think not?

I think that if you ignore all the things that are known to correlate
with global temperature and are aperiodic in nature, such as ENSO,...

You're stuck on aperiodic. Just because something has a spectral
"energy" density at frequencies does not make it periodic. In the
strict sense, all signals are stochastic anyway (they have spectral
energy/power distributed; explore some of the papers at the NIST
Boulder site, for example, since the signals they generate are
extraordinarily "pure"😉.

*All* filters will allow a non-zero bandwidth of frequencies through.
You couldn't see anything otherwise. No one bothers asking a question
that would take forever to answer (unless it is rhetorical, which is
to say it isn't really a question at all).

Quoted message said:

...then any filtering you do in order to try to
find trends in the short-term temperature record
is the intellectual equivalent of a pud pulling party.

I don't think I'm suggesting an emphasis of "short-term trends" to
spite any other information. I actually rejected it already.

I was steered to this:
http://www.safenow.org/