All Activity

it's pretty much congrats Dodgers again. Then a possible lockout after a likely torch winter next year. Fun times!

Yup - it's amazing. From the top of the Klein Matterhorn you walk through a long tunnel bored through the top of the mountain at 13,300' - Ski out the back into Italy for a few hundred meters, then curve around onto the glacier at the foot of the Matterhorn and wind your way down the mountain. If there is sufficient snow, you eventually ski into Zermat at about 5000' asl. If you do that twice in one day, you know you've done something. Of course, along the way you can you may want to stop at a chalet for some strawberry waffles, fondue or a sip of cognac. The cable car/tram that goes from the Trockner Steg station to the Klein Matterhorn holds 120 people and was at one time the longest unsupport tram span in Europe (possibly the world - not sure). Near the upper end the tram rises nearly vertical up the face of the mountain.

Sorry about the Yanks....it will make sense in about 6 months. I'm honestly not torn up over the Sox...I have zero expectations bc this ownership isn't committed. I haven't stepped foot in Fenway in several years.

Tomorrows gonna be 50 there. Sorry about the Sox man

A little sleet mixing in with the cell moving through here.

this sums up todays thread

Winter back for a day.

Yes Ditty. Sorry about UConn though

Looks like this snow cover may last into Thursday.

What's the wind chill?

Snow brings out so much anger here. Thankfully peaceful dewy times await.

You're missing the point and whole picture here though. The scope of the original point wasn't actually about consensus on science. Allow me to re-quote what I was addressing: "The scientific consensus is that the long list of CO2/warming debits far outweigh a couple of benefits. " That's a misleading statement. Note that it's NOT specifically addressing the *science* of CO2/warming, but rather it's addressing the *whole* of pros vs cons - generally this is going to refer more to the societal pros and cons (economic, social, and political) than it is to the scientific. One could have complete 100% consensus (if one found some way to reasonably measure it) on the science of AGW (if that were possible), but still not have any consensus on the other aspects, vis a vis the policy prescriptions. And of course the debits vs benefits very much includes the non-scientific aspects. Stated in the form of a question: Is it scientific consensus that mankind, as a whole, would have been better off - through all of time, both historic and future - if we never emitted any CO2? I have see no such claim made by anyone, let alone any documentation of "consensus" of such a claim. If such a thing exists - please show the measurements, given that this is a scientific thing.

lol.

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Ginxy.

Thank you lol...now who the hell is Steve??? lol

Bizarre.

Gee thanks for letting me know lol That made my day lol

Yep-2010 ended with a bang, but that was it-winter was over by 3/1 although there were big storms they were just all rain no cold air left that year

Is there a way to automatically get all your posts to end in “lol” on here? Like a cheat code?

I don't consider board-bickering a fight....I probably have at it with Steve more than anyone else on the board, and he's a friend of over 20 years.

written by the guy who made the above post lol

Yea, I'm not arguing that there isn't any support for it.....I'm just skeptical at this early juncture given the intensity of the event just three years ago.

Always trying to fan the flames of drama