text:
CO2 doesn't cause climate change.
With 2 votes and 8 points ahead, the winner is ...
Required rating
~ 33 / 5,000
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/4-carbon-dioxide-is-already-absorbing-almost-all-it-can/
The models make brutal estimates and many assumptions (guesses). "Lab-warming" doesn't necessarily translate to "planet-warming": Test tubes don't have ocean currents, clouds, or rain. The "clouds and humidity" factor is mind bogglingly complex. For example, high clouds tend to warm the planet, but low clouds tend to cool it. So which effect rules? Models don't know, but they assume clouds are net-warming. This is not a minor point: The feedback from clouds and humidity accounts for more than half of carbon's alleged effect. E'Gad.
Thus, the above data shows that CO2 has zero effect on the climate and that if there was any change, then cloud cover would compensate for this change and reduce temperatures back to normal. This is because the Earth is a thermostat and can regulate its own temperature using cloud cover. Thus, if my opponent insists that CO2 is adding 0.0000000001 degrees Celsius warming, then this would be countered by cloud cover which would effectively cancel out this extra warming.
CO2 is a gas that is present in the atmosphere, that indeed does cause climate change.
Greenhouse effect principle.
Most energy gets to the earth from the sun in the form of UV and visible light radiation. It is absorbed and reflected back by the earth in the form of infra red radiation.
Gases in the atmosphere that are transparent to UV, but absorb infrared allows the energy from the sun to hit the ground, but absorbs more of the heat coming from the earth. This is referred to as "the greenhouse effect"[1]
Properties of Carbon Dioxide
The observable properties of CO2 are such that it also acts a greenhouse gas[2]
Satellite observations show that the amount of radiated heat is going down as temperatures increase [3] with a spectrum that correlated to more heat being absorbed by carbon dioxide.
Effect of heat on the climate
Climate itself can be affected and modified caused by the heat in the atmosphere, with increased heat driving more changes in climate, including more severe weather. [4]
The current rise in temperature of the earth, and the climate that is observably changing coincidence with an increase in co2[5] because of the above there can be expected to be a causal relationship: co2 traps heat, more co2, more heat.[6]
Contribution of heat from Carbon Dioxide
This increase of temperature from co2 increase is logarithmic, meaning that each time the co2 in the atmosphere is doubled, the amount of radiation reflected downwards increases by a linear amount 3.7W/m2, this works out to be approximately 1 degree per doubling without factoring any other process.[7] this indisputably shows that carbon dioxide is able to change the climate.
When considering feedback mechanisms - such as changes to the earth's albedo due to heat, the cumulative effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and other related effects, the effect of the increase in thermal energy is actually more significant, or about 3 degrees for each doubling [8]. This rate is consistent with temperatures in different geological time and the carbon concentrations during this periods, including during recent ice ages and past geological periods where the earth was much warmer. [9]
Source of carbon dioxide.
Finally, it's clear that humans have been responsible for the current elevated emissions. A primary way we can tell this is that by measuring the isotopic breakdown of the carbon in the atmosphere - this content has increased in line with the isotopic content of fossil fuels rather than other sources: meaning that much of the addition carbon concentration is being generated by humanity.
Human co2 emissions have increased the co2 content in the atmosphere, which due to its chemical properties is affecting the climate.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
[2] https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/wea.2072
[3] https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm
[4] https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange//kids/impacts/signs/oceans.html
[5] https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide
[6] https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21691
[7]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_sensitivity
[8]https://skepticalscience.com/why-global-warming-can-accelerate.html
[9]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere
[10] http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/
My opponent has not responded according to the data that I supplied. He has, instead, decided to give a lecture on the establishment or IPCC version of climate change.
Note - That the IPCC ignores data that they don't like or disagrees with the global warming preconceived assumptions.
Lets go back in time to find the beginnings of climate change thinking.
It all started with John Ruskin's "plague wind"
.https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/12/ruskin-paris-climate-change/420453/
Communists like Karl Marx were influenced by Ruskin, Carlyle and Disraeli.
Thus, the concept that the industrial age was a threat to the environment was born. Thus, climate change is essentially a communist system idea and a way of introducing communists ideas through the use of climate change as a clever disguise.
That leads us to Maurice Strong the person most responsible for the forming of the IPCC.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/paris-climate-change-conference/12035401/Farewell-to-the-man-who-invented-climate-change.html
Extract -
In 2005, Strong was caught having been illicitly paid $1 million from the UN's Oil for Food programme, supposedly set up to allow Saddam Hussein to pay in oil to feed starving Iraqis. He retired to a flat in Beijing, where he had been close to China's Communist leaders back to Mao. It was from there that he returned home to Canada to die,on November 27.
Thus, Maurice Strong was clearly acting for the communists and their ideals.
The graph below shows that the suns energy varies in 11 year cycles which relates to aether flow blockage from large planets like Saturn and Jupiter.
http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/sorce/files/2011/09/TIM_TSI_Reconstruction-1.png
This can cause an average temperature change of 0.2 degrees over a ten year period. Note - Some periods are stronger than others depending on the planets relative positions to one another in relation to the Earth. Note - More light equals more heat.
Carbon dioxide has no contribution to climate.
Under my round 1 argument, I provided evidence that carbon dioxide contributes to global warming, and quantified that contribution under "Contribution of heat from Carbon Dioxide".
Pro drops this point.
Under my round 1 argument, I provided evidence that co2 in the atmosphere is decreasing the heat sent to space as measured by satellites as part of my "properties of carbon dioxide" section.
Pro drops this point also.
These two parts together refute the notion that co2 doesn't contribute to climate change, as they quantify that it does indeed contribute, it specifies how much it contributes, and there are measurements showing the way it contributes (through reflectivity) is occurring in the atmosphere.
These all provide direct measurable evidence directly refute pros claims:
"Lab-warming" doesn't necessarily translate to "planet-warming"
"Thus, the above data shows that CO2 has zero effect on the climate"
Earth can regulate its temperature with cloud cover.
Pro asserts that cloud cover allows earth to regulate its temperature, and asserts that cloud cover has an unknown effect on the warming or cooling of the earth on models.
Firstly, as I pointed out in the first part of this round, we know for a fact that measurable reflected radiation has decreased due to carbon dioxide. As a result, it is an indisputable fact that carbon dioxide is increasing the temperature of the planet.[1]
Secondly, pro omits a key fact: The earth is heating up, and the climate is currently changing as a result. [2]
The idea that changes in cloud cover as a means to stabilize the temperature of the earth is clearly refuted by the fact that the temperature of the earth isn't currently being stabilized by clouds.
While It is true that we do not know exactly the overall effect of clouds on his much the world will heat up, the argument that it will not heat up is clearly refuted by the fact that the world is currently heating up.[3]
Climate change is communism / The IPCC leader was a communist
Nothing pro said here offers any argument against the scientific data I provided in the first round.
The majority of pros point is speculation and insinuation that do not appear to be warranted by the data and sources he provided.
If pro is to show conspiracy, he must show evidence and argument that the current IPCC, all climate data and science and related studies are all more likely to be fraudulent than not, and give reasons why this is the case.
Merely throwing two tangentially related peices of information, and then asserting that it proves the last 40 years of climate science, and all related data is all a hoax is absurd and should be rejected by voters.
Moreover, this is also a genetic fallacy. Even were it true that the idea that humans are harming the environment, came from communism - doesn't render anything that has been said wrong.[4]
Sun cycles.
Firstly, the sun varies in cycles of 11 years as pro suggests. However the heating of the earth as measured over the last 100 years, and specifically the continued and rapid heat rise since 1980 clearly shows the heating does not correlate with an eleven year cycle, but has continued to rise consistently.[5]
Secondly, if the suns contribution is 0.2 degrees, then there is 3 times as much warming still to be accounted for. 0.6 degrees of warming that cannot be accounted for in terms of solar output.
Finally Pro refutes himself here again: after having said that clouds mitigate temperature rises, he now claims that temperature rises are caused by the sun and are not mitigated. How can pro say cloud cover mitigates warming but also doesn't motivate warming? This is obviously an example of kettle logic.
Pro has answered none of the points raised in my opening round, and has dropped all my arguments. I extend all of these to the next round.
Pros arguments fall afoul of basic logic, relying on assertions that are trivially refuted above.
The resolution is negated.
Sources.
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File%3AAnnual_Mean_Temperature_Change_for_Land_and_for_Ocean_NASA_GISTEMP_2017_October.png
[3]https://e360.yale.edu/features/investigating-the-enigma-of-clouds-and-climate-change
[4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy
[5] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File%3AGlobal_Temperature_Anomaly.svg
My opponent still continues to go on his own merry way without properly addressing all of my statements and references.
1. He failed to address the fact that upper and lower cloud formations have warming and cooling effects which lab and computer models are completely hopeless at trying to simulate or predict. Thus, most weather forecasters can't even predict tomorrows weather pattern without any degree of certainly. I have often looked out my window at amazement of the current weather conditions in comparison to the weather forecast by government climate agencies. There is usually quite a huge difference in actual weather to predicted weather. Thus, how can a government agency which can't accurately predict tomorrows weather, then, go on and try to predict the weather or climate in 50 or 100 years into the future? This is a total and complete nonsense which I would put in the Nostradamus pseudo idiot science category.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GeFwaQcmUI
2. Michael Man email controversy - Copy of email below
From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: [email protected],[email protected]
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim's got a diagram here we'll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.
I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith's to hide the decline. Mike's series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Thus, we can plainly see that climate change scientists have been caught with their pants down.
"The old graph inversion trick, yeah, that'll convince em all right, heh Phil"
Thus, we can plainly see that climate change scientists use sneaky tricks to create graphs to fool people into believing that temperatures are dramatically increasing.
My opponent has asserts many times that it is an indisputable fact that temperatures are rising according to IPCC graphs.
The email reference above clearly shows that this information is corrupted, distorted and purposely manipulated by devious individuals that call themselves scientists.
Thus, the assertion that this information is trustworthy, accurate and reliable are all false assumptions.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/20/mikes-nature-trick/
3. Quote - "Moreover, this is also a genetic fallacy. Even were it true that the idea that humans are harming the environment, came from communism - doesn't render anything that has been said wrong.[4]"
Reply - Can you think of anything good that came from communism?
The communists hate and would like to destroy capitalism and industrialisation. Climate change is a sneaky way for communists to undermine and suppress industrial progress by creating carbon taxes and other disincentives which will hinder growth and progress. This is totally wrong.
4. Quote - "Secondly, if the suns contribution is 0.2 degrees, then there is 3 times as much warming still to be accounted for. 0.6 degrees of warming that cannot be accounted for in terms of solar output."
Reply - 3 times warming or 0.6 degrees Celsius increase?
Note - The solar cycle graph has 2 cycles of movement. One long term trend and one short term trend. The long term trend takes 200 years to complete one cycle. It has been increasing slowly for 200 years ever since the Dalton Minimum. My opponent is fixated with IPCC graphs and predictions.
Note - The IPCC doesn't consider that the sun exists. I have never seen or heard any reference to the existence of the sun in thousands of IPCC documents.
Thus, the IPCC is living in a fantasy world of computer models and fudged temperature readings which bears no resemblance to reality.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/20/a-dalton-minimum-repeat-is-shaping-up/
Quote - "Pro has answered none of the points raised in my opening round, and has dropped all my arguments. I extend all of these to the next round.
The resolution is negated."
Thus, we can plainly see that both my opponent and the IPCC both live in a deluded fantasy world which bears no relation to reality.
Quote "Negated" lol
IPCC Graphs are fakes.
Pro states the IPCC faked its data, but the data doesn't come from IPCC. The data has been independently measured from at least 3 sources, NASA-GISS [1], NOAA[2], and HADCRUT[3] from the Uk met office. These are all independent and all broadly agree about temperature rises, and all formed part of the dataset from which the IPCC to draw conclusions.
Pro has presented no evidence that NASA, the NOAA and the met office all manufactured their data.
In addition, anecdotal evidence corroborates a warming earth. Glaciers are retreating around the globe[4], the extent of North Pole ice decreasing[5], and sea levels are rising[6]
While a graph can be faked, it's hard to melt glaciers, or raise the sea levels around the world artificially without people noticing if it were possible at all.
Clouds.
Pro accuses me of dropping his cloud argument. This was clearly and fully addressed in round 2.
To reiterate: if it were possible for clouds to prevent warming of the planet, the the planet would not currently be warming - which it demonstrably is.
Even pro himself admits the sun contributes 0.2 degrees of warming variation. Pro can't assert the earth isn't warming for one argument, then assert that it is for another
Secondly, as I also pointed, we can tell co2 is decreasing the heat reflected into space, which means we can demonstrably tell the earth must be retaining more heat, and due to the spectrum we know it's due to co2. (See round 1). This point was dropped by pro.
Both these facts refute pros claim that clouds prevent warming. As pros argument is refuted, haggling over whether high clouds, or low clouds have the most impact is largely irrelevant - as we know that whatever impact they have, is not enough to prevent warming.
This debate is whether co2 is driving global climate change, not to defend one particular climate model or another, or to defend warming estimates from one source or another. As a result, pros demands for me to justify relative warming of cloud cover are a red herring.
Climategate proves a conspiracy.
Firstly, this wasn't the IPCC, this was a different organization, the CRU.
Secondly, it was talking about tree ring data, not global temperatures.
"Mikes trick", was to show global temperatures on the same graph as tree ring data.
Most importantly, the decline in question was only being discussed, and was part of the scientific literature, and discussed in the IPCCs 2001 and 2007 report.[7]
The idea that the decline was being covered up whilst being publicly discussed is mostly nonsensical.
These hacked emails reflected private correspondence between colleagues, with the worst sounding examples being cherry picked.
Considering that hackers had thousands of emails and documents, that an easily explainable email is the best evidence - rather than original datasets, emails outlining actual conspiracy such as explicitly stating they were going to make up data, or referencing that conspiracy - clearly indicates pros point is wishful thinking.[8]
If this were not enough, an independent investigation found that the CRU's work had been:
"carried out with integrity" and had used "fair and satisfactory" methods. The CRU was found to be "objective and dispassionate in their view of the data and their results, and there was no hint of tailoring results to a particular agenda." Instead, "their sole aim was to establish as robust a record of temperatures in recent centuries as possible"[8]
This means the accusation is a matter of perception only, not fact.
Climate change is a communist conspiracy.
Pro continues to assert, without any evidence, that climate change is a communist plot.
As discussed pro does not offer any real support for this claim for me to refute. Thus it should be rejected.
Solar cycles.
Pro says the sub accounts for 0.2 degrees of warming. The earth has warmed by 0.8 degrees (see sources above), meaning 3 times the suns contribution to warming (0.2 x 3 = 0.6) remains to be accounted for.
The sun is on a 200 year cycle.
Pro blamed the warming that he claimed doesn't exist on an 11 year solar cycle. When this was refuted he now blames the warming he claims doesn't exist on a 200 year cycle he provides no evidence for.
Pro needs to make up his mind whether the warming patterns exist or not, he can't argue both sides.
There is no evidence of a 200 year cycle in sunspots since the dalton minimum, even if there were, as the dalton minimum was a low temperature period, a 200 year cycle means we should current be the coldest point.[9]
The IPCC doesn't account for the sun.
Pro argues that the IPCC pretends that sun doesn't exist.
Pro didn't even bother to google "IPCC Sun", as if he had it would have shown multiple resources and links to reports that analyze the suns impact.
The first 4 links are from the 4th annual report, which factors associated with the sun was mentioned in detail in 4 different chapters:
1.4.3 "Solar variability and total solar irradiance"[10]
2.7.1.1 "direct observations of solar irradiance"[11]
6.6.3.1 "Solar forcing" [12]
9.3.3.2 "role of volcanism and solar irradiance"[13]
Drops and conclusion.
Pro argues that warming both does and does not exist. Claiming both that clouds prevent any warming, and that the warming is down to the sun. This is clearly incoherent.
Pro drops the majority of the scientific basis presented from round 1, including evidence to support the role of co2 in the climate. I extend these across the board.
Pro drops my refutation of logarithmic carbon heating.
Pro drops my refutation of clouds mitigating climate change
In fact, pro seems to simply be throwing things at the wall to see what sticks, countering the well evidenced facts I'm providing with mostly insinuations and unevidenced assertions - this is not how debate works.
Pro must provide substantial evidence that the IPCC and multiple other organizations are lying and manufacturing all evidence. Once can not simply assert this is the case on flimsy links.
The evidence and argument provided clearly shows that co2 is driving climate change and has not been addressed by pro.
As a result, the resolution of this debate is clearly negated.
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201704
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut3/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise
https://www.skepticalscience.com/Mikes-Nature-trick-hide-the-decline.htm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File%3ASunspot_Numbers.png
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg1-chapter2-1.pdf
1. Con states that "climate data doesn't come from IPCC". It comes from 3 different sources which the IPCC then collates and filters and "draws conclusions."
Really Con. That's informative. So you just said NOTHING in other words because the IPCC has the FINAL SAY and the other organisations don't.
2. Con is now using "anecdotal evidence" of glaciers retreating, North Pole shrinking and sea levels rising. Well, Con. I am glad its only 'anecdotal' otherwise I might have to take it seriously! lol
(a) Con, glaciers have been retreating since the Ice Age. Wake up to it!
(b) North Pole shrinking! Really?
Well it looks like all the ice must have gone south. lol
The Antarctic is increasing its ice by 112 billion tons per year.
http://www.viralthread.com/nasa-reviels-antarctica-is-growing-not-shrinking/
Note - Industrial soot (not CO2) from European industry landing on ice in the North Pole would attract heat and melt ice faster. What? The scientists in the IPCC, NOAA and NASA-GISS didn't think of that? I think we should all ask for our money back for the billions of dollars of climate change research.
(c) Sea levels rising?
Hmmm???? It looks like Japan must have got an exemption notice from the IPCC because they haven't had any sea level rises. lol
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/03/sea-level-oscillations-in-japan-and-china-since-the-start-of-the-20th-century-and-consequences-for-coastal-management-part-1-japan/
3. IPCC future claims that didn't come true -
The Claim: 50 million climate refugees will be produced by climate change by the year 2010. Especially hard hit will be river delta areas, and low lying islands in the Caribbean and Pacific. The UN 62nd General assembly in July 2008 said: …it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010.
The Test: Did population go down in these areas during that period, indicating climate refugees were on the move? The answer, no.
More lies from an organisation that Con says is TRUSTWORTHY, RELIABLE and COMPETENT.
4. Clouds can cool Earth issue.
Con tries to navigate around this issue by restating that his temperature graphs are not lies. Thus, Con uses one lie to hide another lie.
Note - The house of cards is getting higher and higher Con.
Quote - "Pros demands for me to justify relative warming by cloud cover is a red herring" (grammar corrected version)
No Con, they are clear evidence that the climate change model is illogical nonsense.
5.Quote -
I have given Con a reference graph in the last post. Con didn't open his eyes and look at the graph provided.
The graph clearly shows that the sun's activity has slowly increased since the Dalton Minimum. This would account for any change in climate so you don't have to look for a cause like CO2 when the answer is already staring you in the face. Being a smarty pants. Con will say that I am agreeing that there has been a temperature increase. Well, the glaciers don't lie Con. But the IPCC does. That's all I am saying.
6.Pro didn't even bother to google "IPCC Sun", as if he had it would have shown multiple resources and links to reports that analyze the suns impact.
I checked all references. No page found. There are no such documents. I have looked many times and never found any.
Yet another fraud exposed.
Con relies on flimsy evidence produced by shonky organisations which make huge profits by scamming people with bogus disaster information which never eventuates.
Clouds don't prevent warming - as the earth is warming
Data: Pros assertions that the IPCC were making up data was refuted by the fact that the IPCC takes its data from 3 independent sources. This was dropped by pro.
Glaciers: Glaciers retreat because of warming. Pro states that they have been retreating since the last ice age. Yes - this is because the earth has been warming since the last ice age, with most of the warming occurring in the last 30-40 years. Ironically pro let's slip here that was a last ice age: How come the earth has warmed from an ice age if clouds prevent warming from occurring?
Sea level: Japan's sea level has been rising since the 1980s[1], it's primarily just the long term trend of sea level for japan is unknown. This data has been discussed by the IPCC, which raises the question: if the IPCC suppress and invents data: why did they not suppress this?
Now, while Japan's past tides have been higher, this is not true of the UK[2], the US and canada[3], australia[4] and South Africa[5]. What pro is doing here is called cherry picking, where he picks tide data that supports his position, and ignores the ones that don't.
Arctic retreat. Some ice melt can be attributed to soot in the atmosphere, but not all. Pro should provide evidence that all ice melt is being caused by soot, otherwise this should be rejected as an assertion.[6]
Antarctic retreat: Pro again conveniently cherry picks one study that analyzed data up to 2008. Other studies that don't adjust for the height of the land in the same way don't give the same answers: meaning that we're not even certain what the study said is even true.[7], even so: it seems that even that is not true any more, as the current massive ice melt that is occurring is exceeding the additional snow fall produced by the warmer weather.[8]
More importantly, as before: if all the real data is being suppressed, and only fake data is being reported: why did NASA allow this data to be released? This, together with all pros other data completely refute pros narrative that there is a conspiracy.
UN got estimates of climate refugees wrong.
The estimates of people displaced by climate and weather related events were "up to 50m" by 2010. The real number was approximately 22.5m as of 2015, with millions more internally displaced, or temporarily displaced by flooding and natural weather disasters.[9]
Not a single person will disagree that forecasting and prediction are not 100% accurate, and pro produces no argument or justification as to why he feels that the UN not accurately predicting refugee numbers demonstrates that co2 doesn't cause climate change.
This point should be ignored as irrelevant.
Pro Drops his argument and my rebuttal concerning the climategate emails. He drops his argument regarding a communist conspiracy, and neglects to continue to provide any information or evidence.
Cloud cover.
Again - pro switches from arguing that the earth is warming, to claiming it cant warm due to clouds. Which is it?
As pro himself agrees that the earth is warming in his previous rounds, and this one where he admits glaciers are retreating since the ice age, and where he blames warming on solar cycles - pro himself refutes the argument that clouds prevent the earth from warming.
As such, even if it is unknown the specific and exact contribution clouds make, by virtue of the fact that the earth has definitively been warming - that even pro agrees with when it suits him - it demonstrates that clouds can not prevent warming.
Pro simply demands I answer a question that is irrelevant, and drops my argument for why it is irrelevant.
Dalton minimum.
Again, pro now goes from asserting there is no warming at all, to now arguing that the warming that doesn't exist is caused by solar activity.
Pro argues there is a 200 year cycle of solar activity. Pro has no evidence that such a cycle exists. The image provided in the last round, and by pro this round shows a total of 400 years of solar activity. There is obviously no discernible cycle in the 200 years before the dalton minimum, and yet pro asserts a repeating pattern.
It is illogical for pro to assert there's a 200 year cycle when there's is not even a full completed cycle evidenced in the data.
Even so, what pro completely ignores is that while he is fixating on number of sun spots, he's ignoring that we can measure fairly exactly the amount of heat that is received from solar activity, and we can use that to determine how much heating that would produce.
It accounts for - at best 0.1-0.2 degrees of the observed warming since 1970, leaving 0.7 degrees unaccounted for. Pro dropped this when it was raised before.[10]
Bad links.
Pro claims the links I provided didn't work, i invite voters to simply click on the link below:
Pro clearly didn't bother to even open the link before trying to argue that the link didn't exist. This means pro simply ignores the whole argument. I extend.
The IPCC is a scam to make huge profits.
The IPCC, the met office, NASA, and most climate research are government or non-profit organizations. There's no goods or services sold, and no shareholders to generate profits for - so that the idea that these groups are attempting to take in "huge profits" is largely nonsensical.
Pros has dropped multiple points in the last four rounds, and continues to do so; including the entirety of my first round where I provided evidence that clearly shows the impact of co2 on climate, and I extend all these arguments for a third time.
Pro continues to change his story, drop his previous claims, and is simply throwing things at the wall to see what sticks.
Pro has confused the IPCC with other organizations, claimed the IPCC fakes its data when it agrees with me, yet the data is acceptable and valid when he feels it suits him.
Pro has also repeatedly switched between arguing the earth is warming and that it isn't.
As a result, the science, evidence and logic clearly refute his position, and you must vote for con.
[1]https://www.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/kaiyou/english/sl_trend/sea_level_around_japan.html
[2]https://www.ntslf.org/products/sea-level-trends
[3]https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/
[4]https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.shtml?stnid=680-140
[5]http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0038-23532007000600017
[6]https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140610-connecting-dots-dust-soot-snow-ice-climate-change-dimick/
[7]https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2361/study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/
[8]http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2017/05/16/is-antarctica-gaining-or-losing-ice-nature-may-have-settled-the-debate/
[9]https://www.unhcr.org/climate-change-and-disasters.html
[10]https://skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=58
1. Growing glaciers
Plenty of glaciers are growing not shrinking.
https://www.iceagenow.info/category/glaciers-are-growing-around-the-world/
2. Global plan to manipulate people with carbon taxes.
Delingpole was among the leading journalists who reported the Climategate scandal, in which he analyzed e-mails among leading climate scientists that had been hacked and posted on the web. What he discovered was a pattern of purposeful and coordinated efforts to:
Manipulate the data supporting the claims of a sudden and dangerous increase in the earth's temperature;
Not disclose private doubts about whether the world was actually heating up;
Suppress evidence that contradicted the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming (AGW);
Disguise the facts around the Medieval Warm Period, when the earth was warmer that it is today;
Suppress opposition by squeezing dissenting scientists out of the peer review process.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2011/07/25/the-goal-is-power-the-global-warming-conspiracy/#6af1ea217c08
3. Sea levels not rising?
If there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
4. CO2 properties.
CO2 has similar properties as glass. That is, glass only reflects infra red light up to a certain thickness and then it is ineffective after the saturation point is reached.
Your response was inadequate because you didn't logically explain why this isn't the case. Merely stating that the temperatures have risen, therefore, CO2 is to blame isn't adequate or sufficient.
5. The Earth has been warmer previously.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11647-climate-myths-its-been-far-warmer-in-the-past-whats-the-big-deal/
This proves that humans have nothing to do with warming or cooling. These things happen of their own accord whether humans are present or not present.
Imagine if the sun just suddenly disappeared. The earth would quickly turn into a block of ice as cold as Pluto. Thus, the sun is 100% in control of Earth's climate and nothing else matters. The amount of influence that CO2 has on Earth's global temperature would be so small that it wouldn't be worth trying to measure. Probably less than one billionth of a degree Celsius. Get over it. Its really just a game of politics and control/restriction of important commodities like oil, coal and gas.
6. Seas rising nonsense.
One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
Note - It only takes one anomaly to disprove any theory. This reference has dozens of anomalies. lol
7. Displacement of 50 million people by 2010 due to oceans rising.
Con didn't find many displaced people unfortunately. He could only find 22.5 million by 2015. Sorry Con, you are late by 5 years and short by more than 50% of your gestimate. lol
Too bad you didn't read the fine details of your own reference Con. The land actually subsided, so therefore the seas couldn't rise unfortunately. That's what happens when you live on the Ring Of Fire.
Oh well, you can't win every debate can you! lol
Better luck next time! lol
Glacial retreat.
As shown in my previous rounds, glaciers around the world are losing volume, pro dismissed this as not being down to carbon dioxide: but Pro conceded that it was due to warming.
Pro now changes his argument, and says that that glaciers are not really retreating. The evidence provided clearly shows the substantial and rapid retreat of thousands of glaciers around all parts of the world.[1]
Pro is cherry picking a half dozen examples of glaciers from a single year - and ignoring the overarching and broad pattern of glacial retreat and asserting these half dozen examples justifies rejecting the idea. Even the primary example of Greenland is incorrect, with simply less melt than expected - not a lack of melt.[2]
Climate gate/Conspiracy
Pro engages in a Gish Gallop, throwing out half a dozen points about conspiracy without justification, argument or additional details - simply throwing out the claim (as he has been doing throughout), and expecting his opponent to expend energy, effort and word count to refute it in detail.
These claims all come from a famous climate change skeptic - as pro simply asserted his claims are correct, and they are so broad and all encompassing that it is not realistically possible for me to refute them all - I will simply link a rebuttal link:
https://climatefeedback.org/authors/james-delingpole/
And assert that these rebuttals are correct.
However, much of the specific article linked by pro is that there is a conspiracy based on climategate emails.
This was already refuted in round 3: and it was also pointed out that there was a full investigation into the individual group.
This was dropped by pro.
As the issue of climategate was refuted in round 3, and the refutation simply dropped by pro. I simply extend those arguments here.
Sea level rise.
Pro provides links to Japanese tidal gauges, and used this as evidence that the sea level is not rising,.
I produced links to British, South African, Australian, USA and Canada tidal gauges that show this sea level is rising.
Pro cherry picked data that agrees with him, and ignoring the broad wealth of data that disagrees with him.
Pro also ignores that even that tidal gauge data shows Japanese sea level has been rising since 1980. It is not the case that the sea level is not rising in Japan, it is that there was an unexplained drop in sea level prior to 1980.
Pro drops that point to.
In addition, NASA satellite data indicates a broad sea level rise, multiple independent tidal gauge data sets - including the Japanese tidal gauges that pro himself sites - indicates the sea level is rising.[3]
Pro must provide a rebuttal to this data from multiple independent sources over different parts of the world. Pro simply appeals to authority asking everyone to ignore away actual data and evidence - and believe the expert that agrees with him.
Even so, the expert himself has been largely refuted and described as a "serial promoter of his nonsense" [4] and, hilariously:
"and among his claims to fame are that he possesses paranormal abilities to find water and metal using a dowsing rod, and that he has discovered "the Hong Kong of the [ancient] Greeks" in Sweden"[4]
So in this case, pros source is hardly credible.
Saying this, if pro believes simply citing a scientist that agrees with his position is sufficient to prove his point, then:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
This is a detailed list of multiple science organizations, academies, groups and agencies who have all concluded co2 produces climate change.
Carbon dioxide ineffective.
I should refer pro back to the opening round where I demonstrate the impact of carbon dioxide on heating. Pros complaint was covered in detail there:
Pro asserts that co2 has no effective about a given concentration. This is not true, as I explained in detail in round 1, the relationship is not linear, so a doubling of co2 produces a specific amount of heating, but the effect is substantial - and evidence was provided to that effect.
Pro dropped this point despite it being pointed out over multiple rounds, and now simply reasserts that initial conclusion.
In addition, it was also demonstrated through the analysis of heat reflected from the earth, that co2 is indeed absorbing more of the radiant heat coming our from the earth.
Pro dropped this point also.
The earth has been warmer in the last
Yes. The concentration of co2 has also been far higher (3000 ppm), and the sun has also been much less strong in the past.
This is completely consistent with the idea that co2 produces a warming effect.[5] In this case that co2 in the past had a more significant warming effect which kept temperatures higher, even when considering a lower solar output.
Pro then asserts that carbon dioxide has a negligible effect on climate. Pro cannot simply assert this without evidence - as the only two arguments he's provided to support this claim have been roundly refuted.
In the opening round, detailed analysis and evidence was provided about the physical properties of carbon dioxide, and the measurable impact it has on the climate.
This involved providing evidence from multiple sources.
Pro has not challenged the science here, other than the single false assertion that carbon dioxide cannot impact heating which had already been fully refuted in the opening round.
Pro made a never-ending series of claims in this debate which he either dropped or didn't bother to defend.
He claimed the suns 11 year cycle was responsible for warming, then that there was no warming, and the that it was actually a 200 year sun cycle that produced the warming he claimed didn't exist.
Each one of these issues he's raised has been systematically dismantled in the rounds above, only to have been dropped and ignored.
Pro makes claims of conspiracy. He confuses NASA with the IPCC and the met office, and the NOAA, asserts that it's a communist plot without any rationale or evidence, he's cited climategate, a completely different organization that isn't the IPCC who's research has been broadly vindicated by investigations. He's cited two highly dubious individuals when trying to support his conspiracy.
Pro cherry picks data that he feels agrees with him, then claims the research is suppressed, and conflicting data is ignored - repeatedly cites studies, and data sets such as the climategate tree rings, Greenland ice sheet data, an Antarctica study, sun spot data, data on the effect of cloud cover, sea levels of Japan that I showed were either outlined and discussed at length by both IPCC or generated by the very organizations pro claims is inventing data and suppressing inconvenient data.
This is clearly absurd, and fundamentally undermines pros claims of conspiracy.
If that were not bad enough, pro intersperses his claims that the earth is warming for different reasons with his claims that the earth is not warming.
He blames the sun and a recovery from the last ice age as reasons for warming - then asserts that clouds prevent any warming from occurring.
This is again, patently absurd.
The remainder of this debate has consisted with pro dismissing data he doesn't like as faked, cherry picking data and studies that agree with him and systematically ignoring the majority of points that have been raised.
There is no other rational position than a vote for con in this debate.
[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
[2]https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-the-greenland-ice-sheet-fared-in-2018
[3]https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/key-indicators/global-mean-sea-level/
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/dec/02/spectator-sea-level-claims
[5]https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm
--> @oromagi
To ramshutu
You had entered the data in good faith that it was all about rising sea levels. If it was about droughts and wars, then the data is fraudulent.
"average of 22.5 million people displaced by climate- or weather-related events since 2008"
After this there is a "Full stop", or "Period", which indicates the next sentence is separate from this one. It is not saying that earthquakes are climate related disasters. The second sentence is talking about big disasters in general, not solely climate related disasters.
Still telling even more lies? lol
Quote round 4 Ref 9
In photos: Climate change, disasters and displacement
Since 2009, an estimated one person every second has been displaced by a disaster, with an average of 22.5 million people displaced by climate- or weather-related events since 2008 (IDMC 2015). Disasters and slow onsets, such as droughts in Somalia in 2011 and 2012, floods in Pakistan between 2010 and 2012, and the earthquake in Nepal in 2015, can leave huge numbers of people traumatized without shelter, clean water and basic supplies.
The source didn't say that.
Environmentalist lying scum bags 1 - Humanity and truth - 0. lol
I clearly proved that con had lied in round 4 by his quoting that "20 million people were displaced by rising seas". This claim was fraudulent because his own reference stated that the displacement was caused by land subsidence and not by rising seas. That proves that con doesn't read his own references and that con is just a bare faced liar. By voting for con, you have joined the scum bag parade of liars and of which includes Maurice Strong who spent his last days hiding in China trying to avoid accusations of embezzlement and fraud.
--> @Barney
>Reported Vote: Ragnar // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 3 points to con for arguments
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
>Reported Vote: oromagi // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to con for arguments and sources
oromagi
Hi Somebody- strange conversing with somebody who has blocked me. You didn't respond to my request for debate topic. Let me know when you're ready. You'll get no arg from me re: my logic which is often faulty- I am here to learn. My point regarding IPCC report was that whether the link was broken or not, anybody arguing climate change should be familiar with IPCC4 and how to find a copy. If we were arguing re: the nature of the holy trinity and I cited John 23- I'd expect you to find that cite, link or no link. Saying you can't find it suggests a lack of familiarity with the primary document- one third of the reason I docked you one point on sources. I agree that Round 5 was your best round. The problem was you started the debate suggesting a focus on CO2 and ended with a general critique on IPCC. I think everybody would have enjoyed an "IPCC is a Socialist tool" thesis better and if you had focused on that from the start I think you might have fared far better. Happy President's Day!
Click the link. Seriously. Just click the link. The link works. The link I placed in the sources works. Click on the link, it takes you to the IPCC climate change PDF.
Simply saying it doesn't work when it does, is insanity.
Pro couldn't find the data supplied by con because the link was FAULTY stupid. Read the debate with your eyes open next time. lol
Note - Its your comment that is messy. The debate was well structured and logical. Whereas, your assessment of the debate was illogical, biased, confused, faulty and messy.
I proved that con was a fraud in round 5. Thus, you can't vote for a fraud. Hint for people with low IQs - (He used false information as does the IPCC.)
--> @Death23
--> @David
TBH it was merely a test vote to see if I could vote
oops- I've been blocked by somebody but I'm sure he'll read this here:
sorry to vote against your terrible piffle, somebody. So your comment is what? outing me with the shit I wrote on my own profile last week? Your comment, like your debate, is fairly fuzzy regarding intent. Hey, tho- If you want to debate somebody I'm happy to oblige- maybe something with less fact & figures this time. I love conspiracy theories and if you think the IPCC is a commie plot I bet u got a million of em. do you have a favorite false flag op? Jade Helm? something like that? Hope so. and hey, man- Happy Valentine's Day.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy4mztkndHk
Quote from your biography - "Likes dungeons and Dragons and play mafia". Thus you are an "F" wit. and you hate Trump. Thus, you are a left wing communist deviate and 'climate changer' and useless bludger on society. Your comment is just an irrational nonsense hysterical reaction to your fanatical and religious like beliefs.
I thought that maybe what you meant, I appreciate you taking the time, and appreciate the feedback.
--> @Ramshutu
I wouldn't worry about it, Ram. I'm not critiquing your style. I only meant that there wasn't much new here to interest somebody's who's read a few climate change debates. Given the circumstances, I don't think you had much a venue for new args or insights and having read a few of your forum posts I have no doubt of your capacity to deliver an interesting argument.
--> @Somebody
That would be a shame. Not enough climate change skeptics on this site for my taste. I like to champion the IPCC myself and there aren't enough opponents.
Thanks for taking your time to vote, I noticed that you said the walk through was dull, if you have any specific feedback on an area to improve there, I'd welcome (unless it was just a turn of phrase!)
Vote reported: Death23 // Mod action: removed
Votes: All points tied
RFD: 1234567890
Reason for mod removal: Tied votes without RFDs are removed. To award a tie on a debate that is neither FF nor when they agree on a tie, the voter still needs to evaluate the arguments at minimum.
I beg to differ, it's hilarious.
Drop it, its not funny.
The lack of organization makes this a difficult debate to evaluate. I'll fault Pro as instigator for lack of framework or overarching thesis: more of a collage of climate change critique then a structured argument. I'll read " the above data shows that CO2 has zero effect on the climate and that if there was any change, then cloud cover would compensate for this change and reduce temperatures back to normal," to be as close to topic as we get. Problem is that there is no data above, just a quote from a blog by some Australian TV personality and even her blog undermines Pro's absolutism. Pro's one source says, "Here's why it's possible that doubling CO2 won't make much difference" AND "It's true that carbon has some warming effect, but it's also true that extra carbon doesn't have the same effect" AND " each extra molecule of carbon makes a little difference, but it becomes less and less so, and there's a point where it's irrelevant." Pro's one source confirms that CO2 causes some climate change, which burns down Pro's single argument. In the absence of any framework and because Pro is making claim contrary to popular, conventional understanding, BOP is Pro's. However, Con proceeds as though BOP is shared and gives us a short, dull walk thru. Pro's R2 arguments are in no way relevant to CO2 or Con's R1. Con correctly calls foul. Pro's R3 still has no CO2- just a critique of weather forecasting in general and some tangential conspiracy theories. Con works up some counter-arguments but we are so far afield from topic that there's little point to discussion. By R4, Pro is at least making an effort to refute Con but there's still not much CO2- essentially Pro seems to imply that if cloud cover or solar cycles might contribute to temperature increase, then carbon dioxide must not contribute. Pro vacillates between denying climate impacts and denying carbon's role. Refuting Con's citation of the IPCC 4th report, Pro states there is no such document....astonishing. By R5, Pro seems to be developing several reasonable counters against IPCC Climate Change forecasting but the original assertion regarding carbon is blurred. Arguing that carbon's contribution to warming diminishes after saturation is in effect arguing that carbon makes some contribution, disproving Pro's apparent thesis. Arguments to Con- he did an adequate job of parrying Pro's unfocused jabs. Sources to con as well- Pro's sources were more blog than peer-reviewed science, several sources contradicted Pro's thesis, and Pro couldn't find the IPCC 4 report in a climate change debate.
Pro's opening argument was a non-sequitur, given that if CO2 caused nothing but clouds, that would be climate change: Which was easily outweighed by con's evidence such as Nasa.giv explaining all about CO2 causing heat with long term effects on the climate. Pro then ignored the counter case (leaving it unrefuted), to offer conspiracies, and complaints about his case being ignored (while ignoring cons... multiple rounds of this repeated).
There are just too many dropped proofs to take pro seriously on this debate, not the mention the number of times con caught him disagreeing with himself. ... Pro, next time I suggest arguing just one of the conspiracy theories related to this, until you have the skill toe argue such a profound conclusion.


It's Halloween in an election year. New Yorkers prepare to celebrate with masked revels and parades, while the city's powerful hold fund raisers and give speeches. Business as usual in the Modern Gomorrah, but when someone or something hunts New York's streets, eviscerating stray animals, slaying the homeless where they huddle, and stealing women from shelters - it threatens a councilwoman's reelection bid.
Dangerous occult texts missing from the massive 5th Avenue Public Library, mad politicians hiding in their posh Park Avenue apartments and a new Egyptian exhibit premiering at the Metropolitan Museum this Halloween embroil the investigators in a secret war for access to the halls of power. From New York's high society to her mean streets, stalked beneath Times Square's busy lights by Things Man Was Not Meant to Know, the investigators must swiftly unravel a bloody skein of occult clues and confront the power behind the killings - or this Halloween may prove their last.
Snows of an Early Winter is a stand-alone Call of Cthulhu adventure set in modern day New York City. It contains everything a group needs for two or three evenings of investigation and horror, including the scenario, pre-generated characters, and hand outs. It is the latest in the innovative line of officially licensed Call of Cthulhu scenarios and supplements from Super Genius Games.


Contact One Look Events for a complimentary consultation today by emailing info@onelookevents.com!
Or complete the form below and one of our dedicated consultants will contact you within 2-4 business days. Include what products and services you are interested in along with your event date.


text:
How to connect Nintendo Switch to a TV without using the dock step by step
But although we have talked about some of the benefits of this Nintendo console offers you, it doesn't all end there. This console gives you the ability to connect your Switch to a TV without the need to use the dock very securely, and you can also turn the Nintendo Switch console on and off with control.
Connecting your Nintendo to the TV in this way is very beneficial as this will prevent your Switch's screen from being scratched due to the dock connection. Would you like to know how to do it? In this article we will teach you step by step what you need to do to enjoy this technique.
What do i need to connect Nintendo Switch to TV without dock?
Using this method to connect your Switch to the TV is something many of its users have done in order to play on the big screen and at the same time maintain their Nintendo with care because, as we said before, using the dock can leave unpleasant marks on the screen of your Switch and also in the body of the console which can gradually deteriorate it. On the other hand, you can increase the battery life of the Nintendo Switch.
It is for this reason that we present this little guide to you so that you can learn step by step how to connect yours Switch to the TV without using the dock. To achieve this you need to have certain materials that we will show you below.
Logically your Nintendo Switch
Dock per Nintendo Switch
HDMI cable (included with Nintendo Switch)
Support or ventilated support surface for Nintendo Switch
USB-C male and female connection cable
What are the steps to follow to connect your Nintendo Switch to the TV?
The first thing you should do is make sure that the original Switch dock is connected to power and also that the HDMI cable hangs well by connecting the dock to the TV.
Now you need to place your Nintendo Switch on the ventilated stand face up. You should also make sure that this holder does not cover the fan outlet the Switch.
Now you need to carefully place the dock upside down and connect the USB-C extension cable on the female side to the USB-C connection inside the dock.
This step can be a bit tricky because you have to make sure that the cable needs to be pressed well, as the spring mechanism is that includes Nintendo Switch dock may prevent USB-C from being inserted correctly. You just have to press it firmly so that it is installed correctly.
Time to use the male end of the USB-C extension cable to connect it to your Nintendo Switch. It is recommended that you turn on the Nintendo console and this way you can verify that everything is working properly.
If everything works perfectly you will be able to see how it turns on without any problem and that the screen content of your Switch is clearly visible on your TV screen.
As you see, connect your Nintendo Switch to TV without using a dock it's not very complicated, it just requires a little patience and effort to be able to connect the female USB-C to the input inside the dock.
Once you get through this little process, you can use this new method to play your Nintendo Switch using your TV, and best of all, it won't damage your Switch screen or console.
You can see that no more scratches or scratches will appear, you can keep it as new. Furthermore, it is important to remember that if you don't have the USB-C holder and extension cable, you can find them on Amazon and the truth is that these accessories are not that expensive and are a good alternative for your Console. Nintendo Switch.
How to link or assign a recorded macro to a command button in Excel ❯
add a comment of How to connect Nintendo Switch to a TV without using the dock step by step

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Home ♥ About ♥ Events ♥ Services ♥ DreamWalker Death Transitions ♥ Books ♥ Links
Appreciations and Commendations
"Margaret Wild's energy work has healed, strengthened and brought me ever closer to the centre of my being. Her breath work draws the spirit inward and the excesses outward and at all times, calms and cleanses. I have certainly been lifted to a higher state of consciousness and the energy transformations continue beyond the sessions themselves".
...Jude Elliot
"The energy and healing work that Margaret Wild provides has helped me on so many different levels, in an unintrusive manner, more effectively than any other treatment I have ever received."
...Rob Ellis
"Margaret Wild's work with me – and my father - during a very challenging time, has been of immense help in terms of understanding, and acceptance; and in terms of a restoration of hope. Her rare ability to listen; her steadfast support; and her spiritual insight, have enabled me to move forward in the knowledge that nothing of worth is ever lost; and that, at the deepest level, love is a unifying force which transcends time and place."
...C.W.
"Profound, unique and deeply restorative."
...P.R.
"Margaret Wild's process validates your life - not all the old patterns and blocks - but real life energy. She facilitates a space with breathwork where hindrances are released and your core energies are granted the space to make you shine. I highly recommend a visit to Margaret."
...K.M.
"This precious work has taken me on an ever-unfolding journey home to the heart of who I truly am."
...Susie Duggin
"Being in the presence of a transcendent, pure love through which I experience the spark of my own divinity and its oneness with that which flows through everything and everyone is for me one of the most precious gifts facilitated by Margaret Wild's work.
As well as the intrinsic beauty of this experience there is always some flow into my everyday life."
...Dr. Helen O'Grady
"Margaret Wild's breath work and retreats have been truly nourishing to the Soul and sustaining to me personally, bringing me into a journey to expand my consciousness and enrich my contact with Home, and with Spirit, and Peace, Love and Joy. I heartily recommend these retreats to all those who have experienced the ache of Disconnection from Who they Truly Are and need to reconnect with their Higher Selves.
Many thanks and much much love to you, Margaret!"
...Dr Victoria Williamson
Margaret Ann Wild
Email: margaret@soulcentredenergy.com
Copyright © 2009-2017 Margaret Ann Wild ~ www.soulcentredenergy.com. All Rights Reserved


Most everyone in the technology industry has heard about RSS feeds, but according to a recent survey, the general public seems to be having a little bit of trouble understanding what RSS is and how to use it. This post is dedicated to those individuals who want to know a little bit more about what RSS has to offer.
I know some of you are thinking, "feed format for what?" Look at it this way: It's another way of distributing news to users in a lightweight text file.
Here's a real world example. Let's say that you don't have anything to do (Hey, it could happen) and you turn on the TV and wanted to find out what was happening in the world. So you change the channel to CNN and start watching the news ticker tape at the bottom to find out what's going on.
RSS feeds work exactly the same way. The only difference is that EVERY channel (translation: web sites) has a news ticker tape running along the bottom of the screen. Now, you really don't see a ticker tape running along the bottom, but most web sites have them and they are constantly being updated behind the scenes.
Every web site I've visited lately has an RSS/XML feed icon at the bottom of their site or on the bottom of a left or right column. The feed icon could look like this , this , or this . Funny, though, how most of the RSS indicators are at the bottom of web pages and that coincides with the news ticker tapes on the bottom of news channels. Ehh...I digress.
This is the XML file that is transferred to you when you request the RSS feed. I will discuss below how to interpret this into a readable format.
Another note: If you can't find your web site's RSS feed, one place I would recommend looking is Syndic8.com. Syndic8.com is a web site that contains a big...no, not big, HUMONGUS list of RSS feeds on the Internet. If you can't find an RSS feed pertaining to your particular hobby or industry using this RSS feed search engine, I would be amazed.


text:
Home Blog Lamborn co-sponsors bill to lift ban on off-shore drilling
Environment/Energy
Lamborn co-sponsors bill to lift ban on off-shore drilling
Joseph Boven
Colorado Republican U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn and a bipartisan delegation of 40 introduced legislation yesterday that would lift the moratorium on deep-water oil drilling put in place by President Obama in the wake of the catastrophic and as-yet-unplugged British Petroleum spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The legislation would require the Department of the Interior to move forward on all "safe oil and gas production."
The H.R. 5519 Gulf Coast Jobs Preservation Act would end the Mineral Management Service notice that halted deep-water operations for six months while the agency works to satisfy widespread safety concerns. The so-called "jobs preservation act" would require the interior department to ensure drilling companies comply with federal laws and identify methods to ensure safe drilling. The bill offers no other substantive details. By "jobs preservation" the lawmakers are referring to oil industry jobs and not the thousands or ultimately hundreds of thousands of jobs that may ultimately be lost as a result of the Gulf environmental catastrophe.
"Offshore drilling provides 30 percent of U.S. oil production and is the second-largest source of revenue to the federal government at $6 billion annually, and has a direct employment of 150,000 individuals," Lamborn said in a release. "Just as you wouldn't shut down the airline industry while a single plane crash is investigated, you don't shut down the offshore drilling industry at this time."
On Monday, Colorado Sen. Mark Udall said at a press conference that the moratorium on drilling was appropriate until the cause of the BP catastrophe can be determined and measures are put in place to prevent any similar future spill.
drilling ban
Gulf Coast Jobs Preservation Act
gulf spill
Mark Udall
Mineral Management Service
offshore ban
Some Colorado residents want their local governments to ban fracking. Here's why that probably won't happen.
Littwin: Cory Gardner makes his declaration of complete and utter dependence
Longmont could be testing ground for limits of local control over fracking
Massive Colorado wilderness bill advances in U.S. House
Move BLM headquarters to Colorado? Environmental groups pan proposal


Bhubaneswar: Realizing the absence of a technical conference in the eastern part of the country, Mindfire Solutions, an 18 year old software services firm seized this opportunity and organised the first technical conference in Eastern India through TechBhubaneswar in smart city Bhubaneswar. A symposium on 'Technology and its advancements' was organised for this purpose that could act as a carrier to impart the latest technological advancements to the aspiring 550 attendees and many software professionals who participated in the program. Founder & President, Mindfire Solutions, Chinmoy Panda, inaugurated the session and welcomed all the delegates.
The theme of the symposium was based on Futuristic and latest technologies such as IoT, AI, Mobile & Web, Open Source & Cloud and Software Testing. To throw light on the latest technological developments to the enthusiastic attendees, Mindfire solutions brought the best of the minds from the country who spoke on the technical aspects and enlightened the gathering. The speakers included Rahul Verma, Sunny Vaghela, Ramit Manohar Kaul, Shivprasad Koirala, Dhananjay Kumar, Nirmalya Sengupta, Ritesh Modi, Pooja Baraskar, Diksha Deo, Sabyasachi Patnaik and Col Prabir Sengupta.


That's great. I may have to give that one a try this year. Although my wife has forbidden me from playing pranks on her.
Did you get that from All Recipes.com?
Yep. follow the link on the word "here" near the end of the post. But I have done this before. I posted it because it was a nice writeup.


A great style and technique, that really adds texture to your drawings.
Jennifer Ackerman loves to Doodle, animals, nature and as you will be able to see in today's post, portraits are included in this list. The following, is how Ackerman got started with the scribble drawing technique: "A few months ago, I had grown bored with my sketching—I felt like I had nothing new to say and drawing felt more like a chore than a hobby.
I decided to start experimenting with new techniques, including a type of scumbling where I just scribbled looping lines to create portraits. I found the technique really fun to do, and I liked the kinetic energy that it added to a portrait." Many great expressions and poses to enjoy below.
No Name and her little Pig.


100% pure natural organic cotton cable knit scarf, infinity loop style, many unique fashionable color options. NO harmful dyes & chemicals.
Trendy, classy and sophisticated, buttery soft natural cotton shawl wrap is holiday party ready. Warm and cozy in fall / winter / spring without being itchy and scratchy.
Wear it with jeans or evening dress, versatile and stylish. Great travel scarf or everyday use, lightweight, warm and chunky.
Adorable birthday, holiday and christmas gift for women, girlfriend, mom, girls and teens. SPECIAL SALE, discounted price for a limited time.
100% ORGANIC COTTON knit infinity scarf, approx 66 x 18 inch loop. Experience PURE COMFORT by Viverano. Ethically woven and stitched at a GOTS and Fairtrade certified facility in India.
100% organic cotton scarf, classic cable knit design, infinity loop style, pure, natural, super soft and luxurious. Non-toxic, non-itch, pesticide-free and eco-friendly. Trendy, classy and sophisticated, buttery soft natural cotton shawl. Warm and cozy in spring, fall and winter, not at all itchy and scratchy. Wear it with jeans or evening dress, versatile and stylish. Great travel scarf or everyday use, comfy, cozy and lightweight. Adorable birthday, holiday and christmas gift for women, girlfriend, mom, girls and teens. SIZE: 72 x 15 inches total length, made into a loop. Ethically woven and stitched at a GOTS and Fairtrade certified facility in India.


Well look at you working a big job.What are you secretary for?
Pretty much yes, if this is a problem then I apologize and I'll leave.
Hey you seem nice,would you like to chat sometime?
Hugs and glomps to my princess heart heart Mommy loves you!


Full Range Of Mechanical Repairs & Servicing at Lawson Rd, Springwood.
Complete your details below and your enquiry will be emailed directly to The Motorists Garage. Please check your contact details are correct to ensure the quickest possible reply.


Video Games. Chris Keyworth and myself talk about video game controversies regularly on The Craig and Chris Show. We talk about the current state of media seeing video games as a cause of violence. More recently, we discussed the Government considering taxes on violent video games. There are a number of studies that come out and say video games make you dangerous or violent, which is comical to those of us who play them.
I'll never forget how video games taught me technology. I remember when I was in elementary school, I used to wake up early and ask my parents to bring me to school because we had a Apple lab. We had the little Apple computers and the legacy 5 1/2 inch floppy disks. You know, the ones with the huge holes in the middle of them. We also had a couple of games known as Super Munchers, the other was the legendary Oregon Trail. To this day, Oregon Trail is still amazing even after all of these years. I was amazed by what these little boxes called "computers" could do.
Video games taught me technology also by producing many of my technological skills. Over the years, as games and computers evolved, my typing skills enhanced greatly. This was even more prominent with the creation of MMOs (Massive Multiplayer Online Games). More specifically this included the game Everquest. The only way I could communicate with other people online was to type.
The enhancement of my troubleshooting skills occurred as a result of my games breaking. My computer optimization skills were a side effect of my computer not having enough horsepower to run the games I wanted to play. So many times I had to go in and optimize settings, update drivers, overclock systems and tweak system configurations in order to get the frame rate or resolution I desired.
My experience with troubleshooting and optimizing video games on my computer were really how I started with technology. Once the ball started rolling, it just became a natural progression. People started asking me questions and I'd have enough fundamental knowledge to go figure them out. It simply would just snowball over time. I've been working with technology for about 22 years of the 29 years I've been here. I still love it. I still can't stop talking to people about it.
Working with technology is a truly inspirational experience because it has evolved, and continues to evolve, so much. I've been grateful that I was given the opportunity to be a part of this era and that video games taught me technology. If I hadn't been a part of this era, I don't know what I would've done. Maybe I would've just been sad, sat in a corner and cried.


More near Lubbock, TX | Contact Greater Town Media 2 | Is this your business?
Whether it's staying warm, being cool or having a dependable modern plumbing system your Plumbing, Heating and Air Conditioning service provider is an important aspect of keeping your home's mechanical systems running smoothly. Action Air Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning in Midland and Lubbock is a qualified and reliable service provider dedicated to helping you maintain your residential and commercial property. We design, install, and service systems that are functional, dependable and reliable.
Ready to meet your Plumbing, Heating and Air Conditioning needs. Call us today!


If you are renting meeting rooms at your location, Operate makes it easy for you to manage them, by providing a default product type, which you can use to add information that is specific to such a product.
You can ad meeting rooms by going to Space > Products in the top navigation menu. Click Get Started if there is no product in your system, or New if there is. Select Meeting Room to get started.
Enter an Online Alias - This is the name of the meeting room that will be displayed on the portal and can be the same as the product name.
Select the Product Group to which the Meeting Room belongs. In our example, this will be Meeting Rooms.
Add the GL Code to link the revenue to the correct chart of accounts in your accountancy software.
Add a Start Date when you want the room to be available and End Date if you want to set a period when the room would no longer be available.
Check Make Available Online to allow this Meeting Room to be booked using the external booking widget.
Select the Meeting Room Type - This could be a Conference or Meeting Room.
Add the Clearance Time - Enter the number of minutes needed to clear the room and make it available for the next booking.
Select the Styles that describe the room. Select a style on the left, then use the right side arrow to move the style in the right side panel, to finalize your selection.
You can also choose whether you would like any packages or meeting room credits to be applied agaisnt bookings by ticking Include in Meeting Room Discounts, if this option isnt selected customers discounts will not apply to the room.
Use the button above the rate fields to toggle between basic and advanced rates.
Add rates that correspond to residential clients - internal rates - as well as to non-residential clients - external rates.
Mins - Here is where you can change how much an hour lasts / how many minutes your hourly rate includes.
Lowest - Lets you set the lower time limit under which you would charge the rate to which the value corresponds.
Highest - The upper time limit, which if reached, would determine the client to be charged the next rate.
For example, if a customer spends 3h20min in your space, you can set this as a Lowest value under the hourly rate and only charge the customer for 3h, at the hourly price. If the customer sends 3h30 mins in your space, then they would be charged for 4 h, applying the four hour rate.
Learn more about how meeting room bookings interact with meeting room rates.
note that ammending the availability will not make the meeting room appear under the location within the calendar - it will make the meeting room available for use by customers at the locations for which it has been made available.
This is used to add a related space that already exists in the system - For example, you might separately rent the desks that are found within this meeting room; or rent the entire meeting room. In such a case, you simply need to select the desks as related spaces. Or you have a meeting room that can be booked as one large meeting room or divided and booked as two separate rooms, you need to create 3 meeting rooms: The two individual rooms( without related spaces) and the whole room with the individual rooms as related spaces.
Hide From Point of Sale is great to use for products that you are never selling through the Point of Sale feature, which you would generally use for auxiliary products such as food and drinks. Office space fits into this category.


text:
Italy considers bid to host Euro 2028 or World Cup 2030
Published at 01:37 pm July 16th, 2021
Italy midfielder Matteo Pessina celebrates with the European Championship trophy after beating England at the Wembley Stadium on Sunday AFP
Italy beat England on Sunday to win their second European Championship
Italy is considering making a bid to host the 2028 European Championship or the 2030 World Cup but must improve its stadiums if it is to succeed, the head of the Italian Football Federation (FIGC) said on Thursday.
Italy beat England on Sunday to win their second European Championship. The two countries could also be rivals to host the World Cup, which is held every four years, as British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has backed plans for a bid by the United Kingdom and Ireland for the 2030 finals.
"We will evaluate an Italy candidacy for the 2028 European Championship and the World Cup of 2030, in which the centenary of the world championship is celebrated," FIGC president Gabriele Gravina told a news conference.
"Let's try for the Euros first, then we'll think about the other one."
Some Italian stadiums have not been updated since the 1990 World Cup, the last major soccer tournament hosted by Italy alone.
"We must improve the conditions of the stadiums because if we do not start an investment path in infrastructure we will never be able to aspire to organise such a great event," Gravina said.
"We must do things quickly. For me, we cannot go into a bid thinking that 'we have the stadiums, but if you give me the event, I will then improve them'. That's not how it works."
Other countries that have expressed an interest in hosting the 2030 World Cup include Spain and Portugal.
Argentina, Uruguay, Chile and Paraguay have announced they will make a four-way bid, and Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia and Romania have said they are planning a joint bid.
The bidding process formally starts in 2022 with world soccer governing body FIFA to choose the hosts in 2024.
Please read our Comment Policy before posting
Florenzi moves to Milan on loan from Roma
Southgate: Racist abuse of England players is unforgivable
Triumphant Italy return home after spoiling England's Euro 2020 party
Euro 2020 crowning moment for Roberto Mancini, Italy's renaissance man
Southgate pays for caution as history slips from England's grasp
Mancini: Italy dominated England
Italy Football
Eid-e-Miladunnabi on October 20
BB issues guideline on non-banking assets
Rohingya arts and culture exhibition starts in Dhaka
Netflix eyes TV's top prize with 'The Crown'
Inter-district bus terminals to be moved outside Dhaka
Opinion polls suggest Trudeau has edge
HC: Run campaigns about deceitful e-commerce
Dr Qadri: 60-70% of population may have Covid antibodies
Satkhira youths buy land on the moon
Bangladesh, UK call for 'ambitious action' on climate change
googlebookmarks
surfingbird


text:
@extends('frontend/layout/layout')

@section('seo')@endsection
@section('jsonschema')@endsection
@section('title')@endsection
@section('bodyschema')@endsection

@section('header_styles')@endsection

@section('scripts')@endsection

@section('ppscripts')

@endsection

@section('submenu')
@include('frontend.layout.partials.menu.submenu-items', ['items'=> $menu_category->roots()])
@endsection

@section('page-title')

Category

                Browse by Categoy

Home

Category

@endsection

@section('content')

Recent Articles

                        We almost blog regularly about this & that.

    {{-- @include('frontend/article/sidebar', array($tags, $categories)) --}}

                @foreach($articles as $article)

                    path . $article->file_name) !!}" width="100%" alt=""/>

                        $article->slug)) !!}">
{!! $article->title !!}

                            {{--  Sefa --}}
                            created_at !!}" class="time">

{!! $article->content !!}

                        $article->slug)) !!}">Read More

                @endforeach

                    {!! $articles->render() !!}

@endsection

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Showing 78 results related to "rape".
Spain's "Wolf Pack" found guilty of rape in landmark ruling
Spanish Supreme Court's ruling, hailed by women's' rights groups and by the government, accepted that the victim's ordeal met the requirement in Spanish law that the plaintiff in a rape case must present evidence of intimidation or specific violence.
India court hands life term to three men for rape, murder of Kashmiri girl
Six men have been convicted, three of whom were sentenced to five years in prison, over the gang rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl from a Muslim nomadic tribe in India-administered Kashmir's Kathua district.
R Kelly charged with 11 new sex-related crimes
The four aggravated criminal sexual assault counts carry maximum terms of 30 years in prison. Kelly was already facing 10 counts of aggravated sexual abuse involving four women years ago, three of whom were minors when the alleged abuse occurred.
Intimate partner violence: the need for a cultural shift in the US
TRT World interviews Anton Tripolskii, a domestic violence expert from the Battered Women's Justice Project, who explains how the 'credibility of victim-survivors is significantly discounted in the American court system.'
Bangladesh girl burned to death on teacher's order – police
Protesters gathered in Bangladesh's Dhaka to demand justice for an 19-year-old woman who died after being set on fire for refusing to drop sexual harassment charges against her school principal.
Affordable DNA testing brings nightmares to Zimbabwe's silent rape victims
With so many rapes going unreported and unprosecuted, victims are instead forced by circumstances to commit paternity fraud. Most have managed to keep their secrets, but the arrival of affordable DNA technology is now threatening to expose them.
US Senator McSally says she was raped by a senior officer in US Air Force
Republican Arizona Senator McSally, who is the first female air force fighter pilot in the US military, made the disclosure at a Senate hearing on the military's efforts to prevent sexual assaults and improve the response when they occur.
Teenager's gang rape and murder rattles Somalia
A 12-year-old girl in Somalia's autonomous region of Puntland was kidnapped, gang raped and murdered, prompting demonstrations in the streets.
Sierra Leone's president declares sexual violence a national emergency
The decision comes following a campaign launched last year after a five-year-old girl was raped by her uncle which paralysed her from the waist down.
'Hercules' signs death warrants of alleged rapists in Bangladesh
Clueless police find bodies of victims with notes around their necks, identifying them and pointing to their alleged crimes.
US singer Chris Brown released after Paris rape complaint
Prosecutor's office says an investigation is continuing. The rapper, his bodyguard and a friend were taken into custody after a woman accused them of raping her in a Paris hotel last week.
Sex abuse claims against singer R Kelly revisited in new documentary
A new documentary series explores the singer's history along with allegations that he sexually abused women and girls.
Stanford Rape


"It is time to go, while the door to Europe is open," said Zopir, 20, who fled the Syrian town of Deir al-Zor three years ago and now wants to reach Europe before his wife, eight months pregnant, gives birth. "I am afraid, but I am ready."
Zopir scraped together 8,000 euros ($9,000) for their trip, which begins in and near the park in Aksaray, a working-class district of Istanbul, by hiring a "dealer": a front man for smugglers who help refugees reach the Aegean coast.
Zopir and his wife are part of this year's record wave of more than 300,000 people fleeing war, persecution and poverty for Europe and using Greece as a springboard. That marks a fivefold rise since 2014 and their numbers continue to grow, the International Organisation of Migration (IOM) says.
Now, that crossing is becoming treacherous and will soon be altogether impassable as autumn descends and winds pick up and churn the Aegean Sea, placid during the summer months.
"This is the last week. After this, the waves become too big," said Joseph, a 37-year-old Palestinian who has worked as a dealer for four years. He declined to give his surname.


We recently ran a competition where people with an intellectual disability wrote in with their biggest dreams. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of entrants wanted to travel.
Travelling is an incredibly popular thing to do, regardless of whether you have a disability or not.
Having a disability should never, and rarely actually does, hold people back from getting out and seeing the world. Sure, we might have to prepare a lot more, but even that can be kinda fun. In this blog, we'll go through some tips for travelling with a disability.
But first - will the NDIS help?
There have been a lot of questions about this, and to set the record straight, the NDIS will not pay for your holiday.
That said, they may help fund additional supports that are needed because of your disability. The NDIS will pay for reasonable and necessary supports you need while on holiday (if you have this support budgeted for in your NDIS plan). Everything else, like planes tickets, accommodation, entertainment and food are what you will need to pay for.
The NDIS exists to close the gap between having a disability and not having a disability. It all comes down to what is reasonable and necessary.
It's worth noting, that if you are bringing a Support Worker away with you, you will generally need to cover the costs of their travel too.
It's really important to explain your disability, but in ways that are really easy to understand. Instead of just saying what your disability is when booking a holiday and let them piece it together, you are best to explain what you need. Do you need an accessible bathroom, an adjacent room for your Support Worker, or maybe to bring an assistance animal on the plane with you? The clearer you can be, the better your chances of showing up and getting what you need.
It's also important to recognise that many people aren't fluent in disability-lingo. For instance, they may not actually know what things like Down Syndrome or Cerebral Palsy are, and if there's a language barrier – you've got no chance!
If you say to someone that you have a disability, nine times out of 10 they are going to assume you are a wheelchair user. You could have completely different needs so don't shy away from spelling them out.
Many places may say that they are accessible, but it is often people who do not have a disability who are deeming it 'accessible'. Surprisingly, accessibility isn't regulated, so you can't always trust that they can accommodate you. Never be afraid to ask them to snap a quick photo and send it through to you. Better to feel a little weird doing that than arrive and realise it doesn't meet your needs at all.
When doing the ring around, our suggestion is to get out a pen and paper and write down all the things that you would need from the accommodation, tour, or flight. Make a list, and then go through it with them. You know your needs better than anyone.
One of the great things about living in the age that we do is that people can post about their experiences, and these reviews matter. It is so very helpful when it comes to finding out if something is accessible from the people who have been there before. Our tip is to go to popular sites like TripAdvisor and search reviews for what you are looking for. That way, you will be able to read testimonials from people who have already been there and done that.
This isn't so much disability-specific, but it is really important. If you foresee that something might go wrong, it's a great idea to have a back-up plan ready to go. Do your research before you go, and if worst comes to worst, you'll know what to do.
Many of the tips mentioned are the same whether you are travelling in Australia or overseas. If you are going overseas, it is best to tell the NDIS so they can make any necessary changes to your plan while you are away from Australia (especially if it is longer than 6 weeks!).
If you're taking a support worker, make sure you are on the same page.
If you plan to take a support worker with you, it is wise to discuss some things with them before you go away.
What will the support expectations be while you are away?
It's vital that you have a chat about what the support expectations will be. Maybe you need support through the night, or you will need a hand with things that your support worker generally doesn't usually do when at home, such as ordering food or going shopping. It is essential that you come to an understanding of what you both can expect of each other while you are away.
You will need to have a chat about what the sleeping arrangements will be, especially if you will be sharing a room.
Who will pay for the support worker's meals?
This is a grey area, and it's best to be upfront about this, so there are no awkward moments when it comes time to pay the first bill.


By default, the Setup program for Microsoft Windows Small Business Server 2003 turns off the Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 writer for the Volume Shadow Copy service. The Exchange 2003 writer may cause conflicts with the Backup utility (NTBackup.exe). However, you can manually turn on the Exchange writer for use with third-party backup software.
Caution If you turn on the Exchange writer, the Backup utility cannot back up the Exchange information store and the system state at the same time. Turn on the Exchange writer only if you use a third-party backup solution, or if you want to back up the Exchange information store separately.
If you run or develop a third-party backup program that uses the Volume Shadow Copy service to back up Exchange Server 2003, you must turn on the Exchange writer in the registry.
To turn on the Exchange writer, follow these steps.
Double-click the Disable Exchange Writer value.
In the Value data text box, change the value from 1 to 0, and then click OK.
Stop and then restart the Microsoft Exchange Information Store service.
For example, the writer for Exchange Server 2003 tells the Volume Shadow Copy service to back up the information store databases, log files, and system files. The Exchange writer also tells the Exchange services to delay any new transactions, to finish current transactions, and to copy data in memory to a hard disk to complete the backup process.
In Windows Server 2003, the Backup utility starts the Volume Shadow Copy service during system state backups. The Volume Shadow Copy service starts the writers that are registered in Windows. For example, if the Exchange writer is registered, the Volume Shadow Copy service starts the Exchange writer.
Because Windows Small Business Server serves as both a Windows Server 2003-based domain controller and an Exchange 2003 server, the Windows Small Business Server Setup program turns off the Exchange writer to prevent problems while the Backup utility backs up the system state and the Exchange information store.


Certificate, Fresh Internship Certificate Sample Free Download was posted May 24, 2017 at 5:45 am by grimteam.us . More over Fresh Internship Certificate Sample Free Download has viewed by 3558 visitor.
Certificate, Certificate Of Attendance Tagalog Example New Invitation Letter Sample Free Download Best Invitation Letter was posted April 10, 2017 at 12:49 am by grimteam.us . More over Certificate Of Attendance Tagalog Example New Invitation Letter Sample Free Download Best Invitation Letter has viewed by 7940 visitor.
Certificate, Sample Certificate For Honor Students Copy Free Graduation Certificate Template In Microsoft Word Microsoft was posted May 9, 2017 at 6:23 pm by grimteam.us . More over Sample Certificate For Honor Students Copy Free Graduation Certificate Template In Microsoft Word Microsoft has viewed by 2455 visitor.
Certificate, Certificate Of Employment Sample Caregiver Best Of Free Caregiver Contract Template New Sample Caregiver Resume was posted January 17, 2018 at 5:46 am by grimteam.us . More over Certificate Of Employment Sample Caregiver Best Of Free Caregiver Contract Template New Sample Caregiver Resume has viewed by 5193 visitor.
Certificate, First Certificate Free Sample Papers was posted January 11, 2018 at 6:59 pm by grimteam.us . More over First Certificate Free Sample Papers has viewed by 1508 visitor.
Certificate, Certificate Of Employment Sample Free Download Best Of Certification Unemployment Sample was posted April 5, 2018 at 12:46 am by grimteam.us . More over Certificate Of Employment Sample Free Download Best Of Certification Unemployment Sample has viewed by 3249 visitor.
Certificate, Sample Certificate Of Appreciation Ppt New Fresh Certificate Appreciation Templates Free Powerpoint Image was posted August 22, 2017 at 10:59 pm by grimteam.us . More over Sample Certificate Of Appreciation Ppt New Fresh Certificate Appreciation Templates Free Powerpoint Image has viewed by 2791 visitor.
Certificate, Experience Certificate Sample Project Manager Best Of Experience Letter Format Download Free New Job Certificate Format was posted August 11, 2017 at 2:43 am by grimteam.us . More over Experience Certificate Sample Project Manager Best Of Experience Letter Format Download Free New Job Certificate Format has viewed by 12023 visitor.
Certificate, Free Cv Samples For Fresh Graduates was posted October 18, 2018 at 2:50 am by grimteam.us . More over Free Cv Samples For Fresh Graduates has viewed by 1227 visitor.
Certificate, Certificate Of Employment Sample Caregiver New Employment Certificate Template Gallery Templates Example Free was posted August 25, 2017 at 12:00 pm by grimteam.us . More over Certificate Of Employment Sample Caregiver New Employment Certificate Template Gallery Templates Example Free has viewed by 4533 visitor.


Photo measuring 3.5 x 2.5 inches. Traces of black paper glued to the back from having been mounted in an album.
Written on the back is Bertha.
Love the image pared with the cryptic message! Thanks for sharing this.
There's a whole movie's worth of subtext in this shot. I'd love to know when and where it was taken. Whoever Bertha was, she looks like she can handle herself.