Re: Damn hurricanes

[citygirl]

17 days without power! That is just crazy and you should know that
people everywhere are thinking about you. Really.. out of sight is not
out of mind! Hopefully it will be a smoother ride from here. Good luck
to you!!


--
citygirl
------------------------------------------------------------------------
citygirl's Profile: http://www.homeplot.com/member.php?userid=166
View this thread: http://www.homeplot.com/showthread.php?t=60751

[Wayne Sallee]

No it won't be smoother. It should be over for this year,
but the next several years it will keep getting worse.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



citygirl wrote on 11/12/2005 11:36 PM:
> 17 days without power! That is just crazy and you should know that
> people everywhere are thinking about you. Really.. out of sight is not
> out of mind! Hopefully it will be a smoother ride from here. Good luck
> to you!!
>
>

[Charles Spitzer]

not quite over yet.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/11/14/tropical.weather/index.html


"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
> No it won't be smoother. It should be over for this year, but the next
> several years it will keep getting worse.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> Wayne's Pets
>
>
>
> citygirl wrote on 11/12/2005 11:36 PM:
>> 17 days without power! That is just crazy and you should know that
>> people everywhere are thinking about you. Really.. out of sight is not
>> out of mind! Hopefully it will be a smoother ride from here. Good luck
>> to you!!
>>

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:54:08 -0700, "Charles Spitzer"
> wrote:

>not quite over yet.
>
Hello Charles,

The increasingly devastating weather patterns are of great concern to
everyone. Everyone that is, except George W., it seems.
I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?

Regards, Fishnut.

[Charles Spitzer]

this was a comment over whether the hurricane season has finished for this
year, as pertains to whether someone may or may not be threatened of losing
their investment into a reef tank because of lack of electricity.

iow: take your political comments to a newsgroup that cares. elsewhere.

> wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:54:08 -0700, "Charles Spitzer"
> > wrote:
>
>>not quite over yet.
>>
> Hello Charles,
>
> The increasingly devastating weather patterns are of great concern to
> everyone. Everyone that is, except George W., it seems.
> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>
> Regards, Fishnut.
>

[Wayne Sallee]

Those huricanes just don't know when to stop :-)

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



Charles Spitzer wrote on 11/14/2005 2:54 PM:
> not quite over yet.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/11/14/tropical.weather/index.html
>
>
> "Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>No it won't be smoother. It should be over for this year, but the next
>>several years it will keep getting worse.
>>
>>Wayne Sallee
>>Wayne's Pets

>>
>>
>>citygirl wrote on 11/12/2005 11:36 PM:
>>
>>>17 days without power! That is just crazy and you should know that
>>>people everywhere are thinking about you. Really.. out of sight is not
>>>out of mind! Hopefully it will be a smoother ride from here. Good luck
>>>to you!!
>>>
>
>

[George Patterson]

wrote:

> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?

The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of high
intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960 period. There
doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is related to global warming.

George Patterson
If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
radio.

[Wayne Sallee]

Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for
it :-) They showed on TV how it will increase each year,
reach it's peak, and then slowly decrease each year.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
> wrote:
>
>> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
>> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>
>
> The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of
> high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960
> period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is related
> to global warming.
>
> George Patterson
> If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
> radio.

[RicSeyler]

hehehe Bush voter by chance? :-)

Charles Spitzer wrote:

>this was a comment over whether the hurricane season has finished for this
>year, as pertains to whether someone may or may not be threatened of losing
>their investment into a reef tank because of lack of electricity.
>
>iow: take your political comments to a newsgroup that cares. elsewhere.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove –SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[RicSeyler]

I'm in the, part of this and part of that group.

I think both play a role in it. I think there is
actually Global Warning and that there are
actually Climate Cycles that occur also.
<crazy huh??> LOLOL

The ones that get me are the ones that think Global
Warming is a myth, and the ones that think it's all Global
Warming and discredit the known/documented weather
cycles that occur on our planet naturally.

Either is as crazy/fanatical as the other in my book.

Wayne Sallee wrote:

> Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for it :-) They
> showed on TV how it will increase each year, reach it's peak, and then
> slowly decrease each year.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> Wayne's Pets
>
>
>
> George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
>>> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>>
>>
>>
>> The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of
>> high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960
>> period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is
>> related to global warming.
>>
>> George Patterson
>> If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
>> radio.
>

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove –SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[RicSeyler]

I agree that the Bush Admin are completely clueless
to anything scientific and to most things that take rational
thought and nuance, but I don't think that is the sole
cause for these occurring in the strength they are.

You can blame Bush/Cheney for a lot of things but not this...
Now if we had a string of Bush/Cheney's for the next 50-100 years,
maybe you would have a valid argument then.

wrote:

>On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:54:08 -0700, "Charles Spitzer"
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>not quite over yet.
>>
>>
>>
>Hello Charles,
>
>The increasingly devastating weather patterns are of great concern to
>everyone. Everyone that is, except George W., it seems.
>I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
>does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>
>Regards, Fishnut.
>
>
>

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[miskairal]

I believe it is a cycle that is perhaps being speeded up by global
warming but I'm not convinced about global warming yet.

Regardless of the cause we have to improve out care of this beautiful
planet. Right now I'm ashamed of what we humans do to it. Getting human
population growth below zero would help a lot too.


RicSeyler wrote:
> I'm in the, part of this and part of that group.
>
> I think both play a role in it. I think there is
> actually Global Warning and that there are
> actually Climate Cycles that occur also.
> <crazy huh??> LOLOL
>
> The ones that get me are the ones that think Global
> Warming is a myth, and the ones that think it's all Global
> Warming and discredit the known/documented weather
> cycles that occur on our planet naturally.
>
> Either is as crazy/fanatical as the other in my book.
>
> Wayne Sallee wrote:
>
>> Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for it :-) They
>> showed on TV how it will increase each year, reach it's peak, and then
>> slowly decrease each year.
>>
>> Wayne Sallee
>> Wayne's Pets
>>
>>
>>
>> George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
>>>> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of
>>> high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960
>>> period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is
>>> related to global warming.
>>>
>>> George Patterson
>>> If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
>>> radio.
>>
>>
>

[Wayne Sallee]

LOL that means having one child per couple.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



miskairal wrote on 11/17/2005 3:37 PM:
> I believe it is a cycle that is perhaps being speeded up by global
> warming but I'm not convinced about global warming yet.
>
> Regardless of the cause we have to improve out care of this beautiful
> planet. Right now I'm ashamed of what we humans do to it. Getting human
> population growth below zero would help a lot too.
>
>
> RicSeyler wrote:
>
>> I'm in the, part of this and part of that group.
>>
>> I think both play a role in it. I think there is
>> actually Global Warning and that there are
>> actually Climate Cycles that occur also.
>> <crazy huh??> LOLOL
>>
>> The ones that get me are the ones that think Global
>> Warming is a myth, and the ones that think it's all Global
>> Warming and discredit the known/documented weather
>> cycles that occur on our planet naturally.
>>
>> Either is as crazy/fanatical as the other in my book.
>>
>> Wayne Sallee wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for it :-) They
>>> showed on TV how it will increase each year, reach it's peak, and
>>> then slowly decrease each year.
>>>
>>> Wayne Sallee
>>> Wayne's Pets
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy, or
>>>>> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period
>>>> of high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through
>>>> 1960 period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it
>>>> is related to global warming.
>>>>
>>>> George Patterson
>>>> If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
>>>> radio.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

[Charles Spitzer]

and i note that there aren't that many people alive who are volunteering to
leave this planet right now for the good of others.

"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
> LOL that means having one child per couple.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> Wayne's Pets
>
>
>
> miskairal wrote on 11/17/2005 3:37 PM:
>> I believe it is a cycle that is perhaps being speeded up by global
>> warming but I'm not convinced about global warming yet.
>>
>> Regardless of the cause we have to improve out care of this beautiful
>> planet. Right now I'm ashamed of what we humans do to it. Getting human
>> population growth below zero would help a lot too.
>>
>>
>> RicSeyler wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in the, part of this and part of that group.
>>>
>>> I think both play a role in it. I think there is
>>> actually Global Warning and that there are
>>> actually Climate Cycles that occur also.
>>> <crazy huh??> LOLOL
>>>
>>> The ones that get me are the ones that think Global
>>> Warming is a myth, and the ones that think it's all Global
>>> Warming and discredit the known/documented weather
>>> cycles that occur on our planet naturally.
>>>
>>> Either is as crazy/fanatical as the other in my book.
>>>
>>> Wayne Sallee wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for it :-) They
>>>> showed on TV how it will increase each year, reach it's peak, and then
>>>> slowly decrease each year.
>>>>
>>>> Wayne Sallee
>>>> Wayne's Pets
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of
>>>>> high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960
>>>>> period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is
>>>>> related to global warming.
>>>>>
>>>>> George Patterson
>>>>> If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
>>>>> radio.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>

[RicSeyler]

LOLOLOL
What about those Raileans?? That thought Aliens were parked behind
the moon waiting for the loading of the mothership! ;-)

Charles Spitzer wrote:

>and i note that there aren't that many people alive who are volunteering to
>leave this planet right now for the good of others.
>
>"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>LOL that means having one child per couple.
>>
>>Wayne Sallee
>>Wayne's Pets

>>
>>
>>miskairal wrote on 11/17/2005 3:37 PM:
>>
>>
>>>I believe it is a cycle that is perhaps being speeded up by global
>>>warming but I'm not convinced about global warming yet.
>>>
>>>Regardless of the cause we have to improve out care of this beautiful
>>>planet. Right now I'm ashamed of what we humans do to it. Getting human
>>>population growth below zero would help a lot too.
>>>
>>>
>>>RicSeyler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm in the, part of this and part of that group.
>>>>
>>>>I think both play a role in it. I think there is
>>>>actually Global Warning and that there are
>>>>actually Climate Cycles that occur also.
>>>><crazy huh??> LOLOL
>>>>
>>>>The ones that get me are the ones that think Global
>>>>Warming is a myth, and the ones that think it's all Global
>>>>Warming and discredit the known/documented weather
>>>>cycles that occur on our planet naturally.
>>>>
>>>>Either is as crazy/fanatical as the other in my book.
>>>>
>>>>Wayne Sallee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yep, it's just a cycle. And some of us are in it, in for it :-) They
>>>>>showed on TV how it will increase each year, reach it's peak, and then
>>>>>slowly decrease each year.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wayne Sallee
>>>>>Wayne's Pets

>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>George Patterson wrote on 11/15/2005 12:03 AM:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I do not hear / read very much objection to his fossil-fuel policy,
>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>does he not grasp the effect of global-warming ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The severity of hurricanes runs in cycles. We're entering a period of
>>>>>>high intensity similar to that experienced in the 1930 through 1960
>>>>>>period. There doesn't seem to be any reson to believe that it is
>>>>>>related to global warming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George Patterson
>>>>>>If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
>>>>>>radio.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
>
>

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[Dsybok]

> LOL that means having one child per couple.
>
> Wayne Sallee


And this is bad how exactly?

D

[Wayne Sallee]

I'm not going to go into all of the social and economical
impacts, but you can look at china, as they are doing this.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



Dsybok wrote on 11/18/2005 8:27 PM:
>>LOL that means having one child per couple.
>>
>>Wayne Sallee
>
>
>
> And this is bad how exactly?
>
> D
>
>

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:04:53 -0700, "Charles Spitzer"
> wrote:

>and i note that there aren't that many people alive who are volunteering to
>leave this planet right now for the good of others.
>
Well , why don't you start the ball rolling ???

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:55:23 -0700, "Charles Spitzer"
> wrote:

>this was a comment over whether the hurricane season has finished for this
>year, as pertains to whether someone may or may not be threatened of losing
>their investment into a reef tank because of lack of electricity.
>
>iow: take your political comments to a newsgroup that cares. elsewhere.


It was not meant as a political statement, but if you are backing
George W., you have put your money on a 3-legged donkey - or should
that read ass (biblical sense, of course).

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:34:22 -0600, RicSeyler >
wrote:

>I agree that the Bush Admin are completely clueless
>to anything scientific and to most things that take rational
>thought and nuance, but I don't think that is the sole
>cause for these occurring in the strength they are.
>
>You can blame Bush/Cheney for a lot of things but not this...
>Now if we had a string of Bush/Cheney's for the next 50-100 years,
>maybe you would have a valid argument then.
>

Who mentioned anything about blaming Bush/Cheney for this ???

If the current U.S. administration do nothing to contain the
situation, and try to reverse the trend, then they can certainly be
blamed. In fact George W. has stated that he is to expand the use of
fossil fuel, and in my book that is almost criminal.

Three relevant points to consider are :
1) The longer the current situation continues, the effect is greater,
costs more to reverse, and the situation for the planet may be
irrecoverable. Surely with the technology at our disposal we are
duty-bound to leave the planet in a better situation for future
generations than we inherited.

2) Very soon, the rest of the world will be howling about China, India
and other emerging economies, polluting the planet due to their vast
industrial expansion with little pollution control. They are thus
entitled to say "Stuff you lot" !

3) I am amazed by the stupid reaction to my post by Charlie Spitzer.
My post was derived from the logic that the first places to be
affected by global warming will be coral reefs and low-lying areas
such as the Seychelles. Although he is obviously too thick to realise
it, there will be no marine reefs hobby, other than for species
currently being captive-bred at the time.

[[email protected]]

Having had my rant, I must say that the most amusing part of George W.
is when he is giving an unscripted speech. When he trying to think of
something to say, his eyes glaze-over, there is a long pause, then he
is still manages to utter gibberish. Hysterical !

Of course, he is following in the illustrious footsteps of Bill.
Instead of spending his academic years learning how to spell "Potato",
history demonstrates that he preferred a toot on his sax., followed by
a leisurely Havana.

Regards, Fishnut.

[miskairal]

Dsybok wrote:
>>LOL that means having one child per couple.
>>
>>Wayne Sallee
>
>
>
> And this is bad how exactly?
>
> D
>
>
The only problem I can see with doing this is that there would be no
aunts and uncles :(

[miskairal]

Wayne Sallee wrote:
> LOL that means having one child per couple.

And why is that so funny? Have you any better suggestions or do you
think we should just keep on overpopulating? I bet you wouldn't
overcrowd your fish tank and yet you seem to think it's ok to do it on
our whole planet which is a limited system just as our tanks are.

I have only one child and no, he's not a spoilt brat. At age 22 he is a
polite, productive member of society.

[miskairal]

Charles Spitzer wrote:
> and i note that there aren't that many people alive who are volunteering to
> leave this planet right now for the good of others.
>
Did I say anyone should leave now? I can't even decide if I believe in
the death penalty (we don't have it in Australia). I just think we need
less humans here and that should be somehow aimed for. If I knew the
answer I guess I'd be a politician. Oh geez, that was a dumb sentence
wasn't it!

Alright I'll shut up.

[Wayne Sallee]

As far as the room in this wide earth, we are like ants.
We have not even gotten close to overpopulating the earth.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets



miskairal wrote on 11/19/2005 5:10 PM:
> Wayne Sallee wrote:
>
>> LOL that means having one child per couple.
>
>
> And why is that so funny? Have you any better suggestions or do you
> think we should just keep on overpopulating? I bet you wouldn't
> overcrowd your fish tank and yet you seem to think it's ok to do it on
> our whole planet which is a limited system just as our tanks are.
>
> I have only one child and no, he's not a spoilt brat. At age 22 he is a
> polite, productive member of society.

[miskairal]

You provide too much good input to this newsgroup for me to start a
slinging match with you. Let's agree to a difference of opinion?

Wayne Sallee wrote:
> As far as the room in this wide earth, we are like ants. We have not
> even gotten close to overpopulating the earth.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> Wayne's Pets
>
>
>
> miskairal wrote on 11/19/2005 5:10 PM:
>
>> Wayne Sallee wrote:
>>
>>> LOL that means having one child per couple.
>>
>>
>>
>> And why is that so funny? Have you any better suggestions or do you
>> think we should just keep on overpopulating? I bet you wouldn't
>> overcrowd your fish tank and yet you seem to think it's ok to do it on
>> our whole planet which is a limited system just as our tanks are.
>>
>> I have only one child and no, he's not a spoilt brat. At age 22 he is
>> a polite, productive member of society.

[RicSeyler]

wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:34:22 -0600, RicSeyler >
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>I agree that the Bush Admin are completely clueless
>>to anything scientific and to most things that take rational
>>thought and nuance, but I don't think that is the sole
>>cause for these occurring in the strength they are.
>>
>>You can blame Bush/Cheney for a lot of things but not this...
>>Now if we had a string of Bush/Cheney's for the next 50-100 years,
>>maybe you would have a valid argument then.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Who mentioned anything about blaming Bush/Cheney for this ???
>
That was glib of me. Although realize there are bandwagon jumpers that
say just this.
Glad to hear you aren't as myopic as that. And I also agree that the
Bush Admin
are dangerous/wreckless/arrogant when it comes to many things, and the
welfare
of the planet is one of them. But I really try to be logical about my
criticisms, there
are too many far left nut jobs that take the legs out from under
legitimate arguments
against their low brow tactics, bullyiness & shameless evangelizing.

But hey, we are gonna get jumped on for talking about this here :-)

>
>
>

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[miskairal]

RicSeyler wrote:
>
>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:34:22 -0600, RicSeyler >
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I agree that the Bush Admin are completely clueless
>>>to anything scientific and to most things that take rational
>>>thought and nuance, but I don't think that is the sole
>>>cause for these occurring in the strength they are.
>>>
>>>You can blame Bush/Cheney for a lot of things but not this...
>>>Now if we had a string of Bush/Cheney's for the next 50-100 years,
>>>maybe you would have a valid argument then.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Who mentioned anything about blaming Bush/Cheney for this ???
>>
> That was glib of me. Although realize there are bandwagon jumpers that
> say just this.
> Glad to hear you aren't as myopic as that. And I also agree that the
> Bush Admin
> are dangerous/wreckless/arrogant when it comes to many things, and the
> welfare
> of the planet is one of them. But I really /try/ to be logical about my
> criticisms, there
> are too many far left nut jobs that take the legs out from under
> legitimate arguments
> against their low brow tactics, bullyiness & shameless evangelizing.
>
> But hey, we are gonna get jumped on for talking about this here :-)

I for one won't jump on you :) I have no problem with threads wondering
off onto other topics. People can chose for themselves if they want to
continue reading and if they whinge about it then they obviously have a
dull, sad life.

Now I really must go as those storms are just too close now.