Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#2071
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote in
news:3f99929f.212852660@news.mi.comcast.giganews.c om:
> On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:07:26 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
>>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
>> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>>and nothing else.
>>
>>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>>
>>
>>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>>
>>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the
>>mid 19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
>
> What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
> (i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
>
>
They measured gases frozen in layers of glacial,Arctic,and Anarctic
ice.Drilled core samples,checked the layers.
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
news:3f99929f.212852660@news.mi.comcast.giganews.c om:
> On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:07:26 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
>>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
>> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>>and nothing else.
>>
>>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>>
>>
>>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>>
>>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the
>>mid 19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
>
> What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
> (i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
>
>
They measured gases frozen in layers of glacial,Arctic,and Anarctic
ice.Drilled core samples,checked the layers.
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
#2072
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
#2073
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
#2074
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
news:Q_hmb.9137$9E1.41396@attbi_s52:
> In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>> I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
>> is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
>> accurate. The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
>> answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
>> scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
>> claim that evolution is fact based.
>
> Evolution is based in facts, evidence. It's an explanation based upon
> the evidence, the facts. It still could be incorrect, but it is based
> in fact.
>
>> I believe creation is the best available explanation. They believe
>> evolution is the best available explanation. However, you can't say
>> either is based on fact or provides a complete explanation.
>
> What if the means of creation is evolution? Throws the monkey into
> the wrench now doesn't it :)
>
>
>
Hey,you guys should read Darwin's Radio and the sequel Darwin's Children,by
Greg Bear. Sci-Fi,but very interesting.(they're about evolution)
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net
#2075
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:2Jgmb.881$RQ1.689@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > I can't speak for him, but I need lots of leg and head room. Jeep
> Cherokee,
> > to small, I have to recline the seat way back to get my head low enough
to
> > fit. Monte Carlo, to small, again I have to lower and recline the seat
as
> > far as possible just to squeeze in. Mercury Grand Marquis, better, at
> least
> > I can drive it in reasonable comfort, but it could stand to be a bit
> larger
> > yet. The 1972 Olds 98 LS I used to drive? Perfect! So now I just stick
> with
> > full size pickups, which could use a little more headroom themselves.
It's
> > size discrimination I tell you, where's my lawyer? ;-)
> >
>
> Well I can speak for him, and I agree with you. I don't think there's a
> single Jap car that I'd want to take on a long road trip. All too small,
> even the Avalon/Camry. -Dave
>
>
Do you get the Mitsibishi Diamante sedans?
larger than a Ford Mondeo with more leg room.
rhys
#2076
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:2Jgmb.881$RQ1.689@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > I can't speak for him, but I need lots of leg and head room. Jeep
> Cherokee,
> > to small, I have to recline the seat way back to get my head low enough
to
> > fit. Monte Carlo, to small, again I have to lower and recline the seat
as
> > far as possible just to squeeze in. Mercury Grand Marquis, better, at
> least
> > I can drive it in reasonable comfort, but it could stand to be a bit
> larger
> > yet. The 1972 Olds 98 LS I used to drive? Perfect! So now I just stick
> with
> > full size pickups, which could use a little more headroom themselves.
It's
> > size discrimination I tell you, where's my lawyer? ;-)
> >
>
> Well I can speak for him, and I agree with you. I don't think there's a
> single Jap car that I'd want to take on a long road trip. All too small,
> even the Avalon/Camry. -Dave
>
>
Do you get the Mitsibishi Diamante sedans?
larger than a Ford Mondeo with more leg room.
rhys
#2077
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:2Jgmb.881$RQ1.689@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > I can't speak for him, but I need lots of leg and head room. Jeep
> Cherokee,
> > to small, I have to recline the seat way back to get my head low enough
to
> > fit. Monte Carlo, to small, again I have to lower and recline the seat
as
> > far as possible just to squeeze in. Mercury Grand Marquis, better, at
> least
> > I can drive it in reasonable comfort, but it could stand to be a bit
> larger
> > yet. The 1972 Olds 98 LS I used to drive? Perfect! So now I just stick
> with
> > full size pickups, which could use a little more headroom themselves.
It's
> > size discrimination I tell you, where's my lawyer? ;-)
> >
>
> Well I can speak for him, and I agree with you. I don't think there's a
> single Jap car that I'd want to take on a long road trip. All too small,
> even the Avalon/Camry. -Dave
>
>
Do you get the Mitsibishi Diamante sedans?
larger than a Ford Mondeo with more leg room.
rhys
#2078
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:bNgmb.890$RQ1.297@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >Name one that is a good value for the money. (I don't really expect a
> reply
> > >here) -Dave
> > >
> > >
> > Most are less expensive than an SUV with comparable seating or cargo
> space.
>
> OK . . . show me one CAR or MINIVAN that has comparable seating and cargo
> space for less money than the typical SUV? Oh, and AWD or 4X4, with good
> towing capacity. -Dave
>
>
Mitsubishi Delecia Spacegear 4x4 minvan with turbo Diesel engine
rhys
#2079
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:bNgmb.890$RQ1.297@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >Name one that is a good value for the money. (I don't really expect a
> reply
> > >here) -Dave
> > >
> > >
> > Most are less expensive than an SUV with comparable seating or cargo
> space.
>
> OK . . . show me one CAR or MINIVAN that has comparable seating and cargo
> space for less money than the typical SUV? Oh, and AWD or 4X4, with good
> towing capacity. -Dave
>
>
Mitsubishi Delecia Spacegear 4x4 minvan with turbo Diesel engine
rhys
#2080
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:bNgmb.890$RQ1.297@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >Name one that is a good value for the money. (I don't really expect a
> reply
> > >here) -Dave
> > >
> > >
> > Most are less expensive than an SUV with comparable seating or cargo
> space.
>
> OK . . . show me one CAR or MINIVAN that has comparable seating and cargo
> space for less money than the typical SUV? Oh, and AWD or 4X4, with good
> towing capacity. -Dave
>
>
Mitsubishi Delecia Spacegear 4x4 minvan with turbo Diesel engine
rhys