Jerry Mahlman: Plants and Birds and Rocks and Things

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:44 AM GMT on December 09, 2012

Share this Blog
18
+

Jerry Mahlman: Plants and Birds and Rocks and Things

I found out this week at the meeting of the American Geophysical Union that my friend Jerry Mahlman died in late November. Jerry was a climate scientist, and for many years, the Director of the Geophysical Fluids Dynamics Laboratory. Here is the announcement of his death, which includes a paragraph about his science life. Here is Rick Piltz's, Remembering Jerry Mahlman.

In 2003 Jerry and I hatched a plan to road trip to Big Bend National Park. Jerry liked to “bushwhack” across desolate places, and in the Lower 48, Big Bend National Park is about as remote and desolate as it gets. Big Bend is also home to a huge variety of wildlife. The wildlife is there not only because it is protected desolation, but also because its climate straddles the edge of the tropics. This means birds, and birds could be the noble goal of any Jerry adventure.

The retired Jerry set out to planning. Another flavor of road trip brought me to his house in Longmont, Colorado, and Jerry had collected a set of suitably obscure information about the places in the Larry McMurtry world through which we would venture. There would be counties where there might be 4 rooms for those passing through – identify such opportunity in advance. Jerry had descriptions that required us to pay attention to the juniper trees on the side of road at the curve 31 miles from the U.S. highway intersection. Beyond the juniper, there would be pull out and a path, and down that path, a gully, and in that gully, the footprint of a dinosaur.

The week before we were on our way, Jerry had his stroke. The rational, though perhaps without fully thinking it through – the rational Jerry called me to explain that despite the type and severity of a stroke that normally killed more than 99% of the time, he was certain that by the time I arrived in three days, he would be ready to go. He had tested his readiness, by standing and walking. Though he was dizzied and tired by more than a few steps, he was certain that by the time we arrived in Big Bend his recovery would be adequate. As a precaution we would limit our exposure to steep trails and sheer cliffs.

That trip never happened. After recovery and therapy Jerry and I did take a set of road trips into the easy hinterlands of Colorado, Wyoming, and New Mexico. We would frequently pass through Fort Collins, and he would talk about his time with Janet during graduate school. On one of the trips beyond Colorado’s Moose Viewing Capital, Walden, we happened upon a “nature” trail on, probably, Bureau of Land Management leased land. The nature trail was maintained by an oil interest, and had signs that talked about the natural warming caused by carbon dioxide, and how the oil industry removed carbon dioxide from the air, pumping it into to the ground to release, safely, more oil to be pumped. Recycling carbon dioxide.

In his backyard Jerry kept something of a rock garden, perhaps more in the style of corralled rocks than, say, the Japanese Tea Garden in San Francisco. In 2008 with Jerry’s short-term memory loss starting to become prominent, we set out to Capulin Volcano National Monument in New Mexico. The noble goal was large round rocks spewed from a volcano. We hiked in the National Monument, and collected large round rocks from a rancher’s field, and then set off through the dirt roads of northern New Mexico and southeastern Colorado. We drove the entire length of the Dry Cimarron River, wandering onto roadside rock crumbles and into easy gullies. We crossed the grasslands, through the windmills and settlements that are relics from the Dust Bowl. We visited dimly lit, small-town museums that were housed in repurposed general stores and gas stations. We tried to use, whenever possible, Colorado Highway 71, which ran north into Nebraska to his hometown of Crawford, and beyond to Janet’s hometown of Hot Springs, South Dakota.



Jerry Mahlman in a gully of the Dry Cimarron River, New Mexico, 2008

Our last trip was in 2009 - too early for a last trip, but lives get complicated. It was October. We started up over mountains in Wyoming, but the roads were closed to our demure vehicle. So we hiked Vedauwoo Rocks, and then we went down a barren Wyoming road that had remained solidly anchored in Jerry’s memory. We ate at a Chinese restaurant, in a town that met the required criterion of at least two Chinese restaurants – to assure some quality from competition. The hot and sour soup passed muster. The Scoville Scale was unchallenged.

From that common place where it was understood that is was OK to be Ricky, not Richard – to Jerry.

ricky



Jerry Mahlman at Vedawoo, Wyoming, 2009

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 239 - 189

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6Blog Index

Quoting Xandra:

From Australian Red Cross:

World Disasters Report: 2010 death toll highest in decade

...The deadliest disasters were the Haiti earthquake (more than 220,000 deaths) and an extraordinary heatwave in Russia (more than 55,000 deaths)...

According to the report, the heatwave in Russia led to 55,736 deaths.
Member Since: November 22, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1226
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:

All of the links I find more support your 15,000 count. These links I found were from 2010 reports of the heatwave and fires. The report I linked is a 02-12 article. Since the article does not state how they arrived at 55,000 I could only guess that this is an updated count. I have not been able to verify this.

From Australian Red Cross:

World Disasters Report: 2010 death toll highest in decade

...The deadliest disasters were the Haiti earthquake (more than 220,000 deaths) and an extraordinary heatwave in Russia (more than 55,000 deaths)...

Member Since: November 22, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1226
Quoting Ossqss:
So, did you know the earth has not warmed for 16 years?
Quoting NeapolitanFan:
Perhaps you should read the entire report rather than, as most on this blog write, "cherry-pick." I suppose that warmists are now going to be called "deniers" after this report becomes public....Look at the IPCC's own graph. Where is the warming?
The always excellent Tamino performed a devastating takedown of both these bits of denialist nonsense in a new blog post published last evening. ("Fake skeptic draws fake picture of Global Temperature"). It's a lengthy article filled with many excellent graphics, so I suggest everyone read it, even--if not especially--this forum's resident deniers, as it contains healthy doses of truth, fact, and intellectual honesty. In short: a) warming hasn't stopped, and b) temperature observations have indeed been "right down the middle" of the IPCC's FAR, SAR, TAR, and AR4 scenarios.

Science FTW!
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13281
Quoting misanthrope:

.

Final note, there are consequences from everything you say or do. Hope you're good with that.



I almost forgot this to reply to this. Here is my reply

"


Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting Ossqss:


LOL, you present an imageshack graphic from a web site and a blog post, and I give you a reference that is legitimate. Hadcrut4 data. No more time wasted here.

You gave nothing but your opinion and a claim.

I provided the data that demonstrates both your claim and your opinion to be wrong. I don't blame you from running -your nonsense has been exposed for the rubbish it is.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5214
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:
All of the links I find more support your 15,000 count. These links I found were from 2010 reports of the heatwave and fires. The report I linked is a 02-12 article. Since the article does not state how they arrived at 55,000 I could only guess that this is an updated count. I have not been able to verify this.
Thank you for your efforts trying to find the info sir
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
All of the links I find more support your 15,000 count. These links I found were from 2010 reports of the heatwave and fires. The report I linked is a 02-12 article. Since the article does not state how they arrived at 55,000 I could only guess that this is an updated count. I have not been able to verify this.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Quoting Birthmark:

Got a link to that? 'Cause here's what I'm looking at:


So, let's see what you've got. Perhaps you're talking about the Daily Fail nonsense? If so, Tamino has already dispensed with that nonsense: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/temperatur e -analysis-by-david-rose-doesnt-smell-so-sweet/


LOL, you present an imageshack graphic from a web site and a blog post, and I give you a reference that is legitimate. Hadcrut4 data. No more time wasted here>

Science is a "Policy of Truth"

Remember that!

Gnight



Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8183
Quoting misanthrope:

That's a link to information about the '38 hurricane - nothing about Sandy. Sorry Dude, but I've reached the end of my patience with you, you're now on your own.

Final note, there are consequences from everything you say or do. Hope you're good with that.

which proves it had just as low or lower pressure than Sandy. Mann says Sandy beat it. So whether it was a hurricane or Extra-tropical I have provided links and evidence to prove what he claims is wrong.

Now apologize or prove Sandy had a lower pressure for either type of storm.

Check post 224 for sandy vs 1938 (Source Climate Central)

I will be waiting

Just for fun here you go another link which includes sandy VS hurricane 1938 Low pressure

Site won't link so I will just type it
icyclone.com/now/2012/oct/30-octorber-2012.html

but here is the part that matters

Central Pressure. Sandy's estimated landfall pressure of 946 mb in New Jersey was very low but not quite as low as the landfall pressure of the Long Island Express Hurrricane of 1938. In the 1938 storm, Bellport, NY, reported 946 mb however, reanalysis suggests the actual central pressure was 941 mb. Given this, 1938 is still king by a solid margin.

You have been PWNED
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
Yea rookie I just never found how they arrived at that number. I have seen 15,000


I cannot tell you how they arrived at that number either. I will try to find out how they arrived at the number.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Quoting nymore:
Here you lazy bum does everyone always do your work for you.

Link

If you don't believe the NWS, Ask and I will go back and find the rest.

I'll be waiting for that apology

That's a link to information about the '38 hurricane - nothing about Sandy. Sorry Dude, but I've reached the end of my patience with you, you're now on your own.

Final note, there are consequences from everything you say or do. Hope you're good with that.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


The very first sentence of the article - "The heat wave that struck western Russia in summer 2010, killing 55,000 people, broke July temperatures records and caused $15 billion in damage."
Yea rookie I just never found how they arrived at that number. I have seen 15,000
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
That was over 2 years ago, this is today. As for Eygpt and Libya and the whole middle east. That place is not exactly steady as she goes, I do not find it odd to have wild swings in prices in a war torn area. Also where did they come up 55,000 death no info in your link is provided for such a claim.


The very first sentence of the article - "The heat wave that struck western Russia in summer 2010, killing 55,000 people, broke July temperatures records and caused $15 billion in damage."
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4728
Quoting misanthrope:

Yep, "Not Found". Why am I not surprised. You ever figure it out, just let me know.
try again it has been fixed
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
Here you lazy bum does everyone always do your work for you.

Link

Yep, "Not Found". Why am I not surprised. You ever figure it out, just let me know.
Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Here is another Link
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting misanthrope:

Sorry, but I can't see where you've provided a link to that information. Hate to break it to you but just because you think it's so don't make it so.

Put up or shut up.

Here you lazy bum does everyone always do your work for you.

Link

If you don't believe the NWS, Ask and I will go back and find the rest.

I'll be waiting for that apology
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
Yep those damn liars at the NWS

Sorry, but I can't see where you've provided a link to that information. Hate to break it to you but just because you think it's so don't make it so.

Put up or shut up.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting misanthrope:

Dude, you make the the accusation, the onus id on you to back it up. Obviously you can't do that. So sad, too bad.

Such is life.

Yep those damn liars at the NWS

Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
What do I have to hold your hand.

The one in post 216 is so easy to find a blind dog could do it.
Now I will wait for an apology from you

Dude, you make the the accusation, the onus is on you to back it up. Obviously you can't do that. So sad, too bad.

Such is life.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting Ossqss:


Well if you are actually typing about the evidence. The statistical significance of the trend from 1997 to now is within the margin of error. That means no statistically significant change in temperature over the last 16 years has occurred.

That's the fact. The MET office even published this information.

Barking up the wrong tree again


Got a link to that? 'Cause here's what I'm looking at:


So, let's see what you've got. Perhaps you're talking about the Daily Fail nonsense? If so, Tamino has already dispensed with that nonsense: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/temperatur e -analysis-by-david-rose-doesnt-smell-so-sweet/
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5214
Quoting misanthrope:

What sources? Again, you didn't provide a link so there's nothing for me to check.

Question is, why won't you provide links?

What do I have to hold your hand.

The one in post 216 is so easy to find a blind dog could do it. If three separate sources won't do, even when one of them is a pro global warming site, I don't know what will

Now I will wait for an apology from you
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
It says Climate central on the first one and the second one says Francis 1998
Now go to the sources yourself and check them. then come back here and apologize

What sources? Again, you didn't provide a link so there's nothing for me to check.

Question is, why won't you provide links?

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Just for good measure

The lowest pressure at the time of landfall occurred on the south side of Long Island, at Bellport, where a reading of 27.94 inches was recorded. Other low pressures included 28.00 inches in Middletown, Connecticut and 28.04 inches in Hartford, Connecticut. Source NWS Boston Mass.

I would have to guess it was more powerful south of Ny and North of Hatteras. Not that it matters though
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting Birthmark:

Ah, so you accept evidence that isn't statistically significant. Therefore, you don't know what evidence means or what it's for. Either that, or you're trying to sell a steaming pile.

The data you cite is incapable of supporting any conclusion in any meaningful way.


Well if you are actually typing about the evidence. The statistical significance of the trend from 1997 to now is within the margin of error. That means no statistically significant change in temperature over the last 16 years has occurred.

That's the fact. The MET office even published this information.

Barking up the wrong tree again

Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8183
Quoting misanthrope:

You didn't post a link, there was nothing for me to check. Question is, why won't you post links? Obvious answer, of course, is that you've got something to hide.

It says Climate central on the first one and the second one says Francis 1998
Now go to the sources yourself and check them. then come back here and apologize
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
No you just can not admit your wrong so even when I show the source you dismiss it, now I know you never had time to actually check the source before you posted

You didn't post a link, there was nothing for me to check. Question is, why won't you post links? Obvious answer, of course, is that you've got something to hide.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting misanthrope:

Again, if you don't provide a link or specific citation, it's just more of you saying stuff. Again and again and again...

No you just can not admit your wrong so even when I show the source you dismiss it, now I know you never had time to actually check the source before you posted
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:

Air Pressure Records:

- Sandy had a minimum central pressure of 946 mb when it made landfall, which was the second-lowest pressure of any storm to come ashore north of Cape Hatteras, N.C. Only the Hurricane of 1938 had a lower air pressure reading at landfall that far north, which was 941 mb. In general, the lower the air pressure the stronger the storm

Do you want the source you won't like it Climate Central

and another source

Facts of the 1938 Hurricane (Francis, 1998)
Peak Steady Winds - 121 mph
Peak Gust - 186 mph at Blue Hill Observatory, MA.
Lowest Pressure - 27.94 in (946.2 mb) at Bellport, NY
Peak Storm Surge - 17 ft. above normal high tide (RI)
Peak Wave Heights - 50 ft. at Gloucester, MA
Deaths - 700 (600 in New England)
Homeless - 63,000
Homes, Buildings Destroyed - 8,900
Boats Lost - 3,300
Trees Destroyed - 2 Billion (approx.)
Cost - $620 million (1938)

So Sandy Never beat it


I guess you need to apologize
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
Air Pressure Records:

- Sandy had a minimum central pressure of 946 mb when it made landfall, which was the second-lowest pressure of any storm to come ashore north of Cape Hatteras, N.C. Only the Hurricane of 1938 had a lower air pressure reading at landfall that far north, which was 941 mb. In general, the lower the air

Do you want the source you won't like it Climate Central

Again, if you don't provide a link or specific citation, it's just more of you saying stuff. Again and again and again...

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Air Pressure Records:

- Sandy had a minimum central pressure of 946 mb when it made landfall, which was the second-lowest pressure of any storm to come ashore north of Cape Hatteras, N.C. Only the Hurricane of 1938 had a lower air pressure reading at landfall that far north, which was 941 mb. In general, the lower the air pressure the stronger the storm

Do you want the source you won't like it Climate Central

and another source

Facts of the 1938 Hurricane (Francis, 1998)
Peak Steady Winds - 121 mph
Peak Gust - 186 mph at Blue Hill Observatory, MA.
Lowest Pressure - 27.94 in (946.2 mb) at Bellport, NY
Peak Storm Surge - 17 ft. above normal high tide (RI)
Peak Wave Heights - 50 ft. at Gloucester, MA
Deaths - 700 (600 in New England)
Homeless - 63,000
Homes, Buildings Destroyed - 8,900
Boats Lost - 3,300
Trees Destroyed - 2 Billion (approx.)
Cost - $620 million (1938)

So Sandy Never beat it
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
Who is the imaginary person

Didn't say imaginary, I said unnamed. Again, big difference.

Only you can reveal the name of the unnamed individual to which you were referring. Unless, of course, they really were a figment of your imagination; in which case they really are imaginary and then, of course, all bets are off.

BTW - still waiting to the links that would substantiate you libelous accusation that Michael Mann is a liar. Barring that, we'll wait for your apology.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting Ossqss:


Try the data from 1997 - present via Hadcrut 4 and see the statistical proof for yourself.

Next>

Ah, so you accept evidence that isn't statistically significant. Therefore, you don't know what evidence means or what it's for. Either that, or you're trying to sell a steaming pile.

The data you cite is incapable of supporting any conclusion in any meaningful way.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5214
Quoting misanthrope:

Now you're just blabbering. We'll go back to the original question - do you have any evidence that Michael Mann lied in the Accuweather interview. Telling me what you think some unnamed person said is meaningless. Give us a link to your supposed evidence so we can give it a fair look. Failing that, it's just you saying stuff. Again and again and again.....
Who is the imaginary person
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting Daisyworld:

[...]


So it devolves to this now, Nymore? An eye-for-an-eye? From the looks of it, that's the road you went down here. Need you be reminded that YOU cast the first brick in this commentary? See comment #10 if you need a reminder (and enjoy your own helping of crow with that). Neapolitan may have resorted to the admonished practice of abrasive labelling, but I see his tactics as reactionary rather than instigative. From my experience, he's more than willing to be civil when you show reasonably reflective thinking in your comments, and don't post pejorative fallacies of logic intended to misinform other readers.

You, unfortunately, along with a handful of anti-scientific propagandists who stalk this forum (Ossqss, Iceagecoming, NeapolianFan, Yoboi, or whoever else wishes to claim false victory), choose to engage in petitio principii and sophism to argue minutia unrelated to the topic at hand, trampling on the foundations of information literacy (not to mention someone else's in memoriam) in the process.

For that alone, I have zero respect for your opinion. As far as I'm concerned, you've opened yourself up to Neapolitan's wrath (or Birthmark's, or Rookie's) long ago, and deserve whatever tit-for-tat dialog you heap upon yourself. I reject your claims of ad hominem, and instead, condemn your arguments to the Gehenna of tu quoque.
Reactionary to who. Someone who has never posted on this blog As far as you go I could care less. Neapolitan's Wrath Ha Ha Ha I have met tougher 12 year old girls. I will sleep like a baby with no fear of the wrath.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting Birthmark:

Rubbish. Please show any statistically significant evidence that it has not warmed for 16 years. (Hint: You can't.)


You'd do well to take your own advice. Had you done that, you wouldn't have made the rather silly claim above.

To everyone else, howdy! I've been pretty busy the last couple of months. I've moved to Florida...again. The older one gets the harder such moves seem to be. Or maybe that's just me. :)


Try the data from 1997 - present via Hadcrut 4 and see the statistical proof for yourself.

Next>
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8183
Quoting nymore:
I am just telling you what he says if you don't like it bring it up with him.

Now you're just blabbering. We'll go back to the original question - do you have any evidence that Michael Mann lied in the Accuweather interview. Telling me what you think some unnamed person said is meaningless. Give us a link to your supposed evidence so we can give it a fair look. Failing that, it's just you saying stuff. Again and again and again.....
Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting nymore:


Rather selective yourself I see. I think you left out the biggest stone thrower of them all. I wonder why?

Perhaps its because you missed these gems: Little Anthony, idiot/liar, blathering, blithering, bleating buffoon...

If someone want to call me names believe me I can take it. I have been called much much worse by far better.

[...]
Quoting nymore:
I am just telling you what he says if you don't like it bring it up with him. You know like Coastal surge and Storm surge


So it devolves to this now, Nymore? An eye-for-an-eye? From the looks of it, that's the road you went down here. Need you be reminded that YOU cast the first brick in this commentary? See comment #10 if you need a reminder (and enjoy your own helping of crow with that). Neapolitan may have resorted to the admonished practice of abrasive labelling, but I see his tactics as reactionary rather than instigative. From my experience, he's more than willing to be civil when you show reasonably reflective thinking in your comments, and don't post pejorative fallacies of logic intended to misinform other readers.

You, unfortunately, along with a handful of anti-scientific propagandists who stalk this forum (Ossqss, Iceagecoming, NeapolianFan, Yoboi, or whoever else wishes to claim false victory), choose to engage in petitio principii and sophism to argue minutia unrelated to the topic at hand, trampling on the foundations of information literacy (not to mention someone else's in memoriam) in the process.

For that alone, I have zero respect for your opinion. As far as I'm concerned, you've opened yourself up to Neapolitan's wrath (or Birthmark's, or Rookie's) long ago, and deserve whatever tit-for-tat dialog you heap upon yourself. I reject your claims of ad hominem, and instead, condemn your arguments to the Gehenna of tu quoque.
Member Since: January 11, 2012 Posts: 6 Comments: 787
Quoting misanthrope:

Who says? Are you really gonna go with Sandy wasn't really a hurricane? I'd be happy to provide evidence to contradict that assertion.


I am just telling you what he says if you don't like it bring it up with him. You know like Coastal surge and Storm surge
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting nymore:
He says storm of its sort not hurricane.

Who says? Are you really gonna go with Sandy wasn't really a hurricane? I'd be happy to provide evidence to contradict that assertion.


Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
Quoting ncstorm:


If you dont mind, I would like to be the "Don King" of this and will even sponsor it with a donation of $20.00 to the winner's charity..It would be interesting to see you both debate..

"Rumble In the Climate"

If Nea agrees of course.

He's not ready for Neapolitan. He ran away from me at the first hint of an excuse...and I don't even make snazzy graphics like Nea.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5214
198. yoboi
Quoting schwankmoe:
is this a debate? i thought it was supposed to be a eulogy. (checks dr. rood's post) yeah, it's a eulogy all right.

i guess it's just the nature of the internet. people will turn anything at all into something about them instead.

i hope that when y'all finally meet your maker you have a friend who will write kind words about you and your life as dr. rood did about his friend dr. mahlman.

and i really hope that a bunch of internet jokers don't take over the whole thing and make it some argument about something else entirely.




sorry i guess i missed your eulogy ya posted on here..
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1993
197. yoboi
hey neap i am use to your crickets i got so many crickets i am going to take them and go white perch fishing tonight......if i catch plenty i will send you the ones filled with non mercury....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1993
is this a debate? i thought it was supposed to be a eulogy. (checks dr. rood's post) yeah, it's a eulogy all right.

i guess it's just the nature of the internet. people will turn anything at all into something about them instead.

i hope that when y'all finally meet your maker you have a friend who will write kind words about you and your life as dr. rood did about his friend dr. mahlman.

and i really hope that a bunch of internet jokers don't take over the whole thing and make it some argument about something else entirely.

Quoting yoboi:


you are really bringing something great into a debate...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting misanthrope:

Sorry, no link, not citation. Just you saying stuff.

Just wondering, that low pressure come from a hurricane? Seems a bit north for that.

He says storm of its sort not hurricane.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2210
Quoting yoboi:


if you can scroll back to my challenge to neap...not into debating the puppets...


If you dont mind, I would like to be the "Don King" of this and will even sponsor it with a donation of $20.00 to the winner's charity..It would be interesting to see you both debate..

"Rumble In the Climate"

If Nea agrees of course.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:


if you can scroll back to my challenge to neap...not into debating the puppets...

I'm not neap. I don't care what you and he have going on between you or what challenge you made to him. Nor am I going to re-read the whole thread to try to discern what you are taking about.

If you have something that you think needs debating then you should post it. The very least you can do is link to your challenge or quote it. If you don't want to make such minimal efforts to foster discussion then I'll assume that you were blowing smoke (perhaps in an effort to find a mate) and I'll move on to something more interesting.

EDIT: Ah, I see that you are running off now. No surprise there. Have a good 'un, little one.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5214
192. yoboi
Quoting Birthmark:

What science it is that you think is up for debate at this point? I gave you a list to choose from. It wasn't comprehensive, so if there's some other meaningful aspect that you think is up for debate...well, you just post it, little trailhand, and we'll have a look at it. lol



sorry not into debating puppets or the neap plus monkeys...my bad
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1993
Quoting nymore:
Low pressure 940.2 MB (1/20/1977) St.Anthony Newfoundland
unless that is not north of Hatteras. Would you like the source Chris Burt Wunderground.

Sorry, no link, no citation. Just you saying stuff.

Just wondering, that low pressure come from a hurricane? Seems a bit north for that.

Member Since: February 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 532
190. yoboi
Quoting Birthmark:

What science it is that you think is up for debate at this point? I gave you a list to choose from. It wasn't comprehensive, so if there's some other meaningful aspect that you think is up for debate...well, you just post it, little trailhand and we'll have a look at it. lol


if you can scroll back to my challenge to neap...not into debating the puppets...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1993
189. yoboi
Quoting misanthrope:

You say the sky is blue and I say there's clouds in the sky. Our descriptions of the sky are different but not necessarily contradictory.

Hint: There can be clouds in a blue sky.





really please don't me quote websters....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 6 Comments: 1993

Viewing: 239 - 189

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.