Pete - NO - I agree w/Ken! And it was NOT a Knee-Jerk reaction. In fact - I believe that Ken was saying this should be [OT] in regards to Michael's reply - since THAT Reply now pushed this thread into a HIGHLY [OT} arena - since his response was SO CRITICAL Against those that believe in Global Warming. And - since that has been such a HEATED DEBATE over the years - and Essentially a VERY MUCH Political type of debate - then THAT is the reason that this is now [OT].
So - Pete - considering what I wrote - would you NOW agree that this topic has run into the [OT] territory??? [Also - notice I did NOT give an opinion on Global Warming - I am simply pointing out that this is a heated topic and is now an [OT] topic. I would have actually changed the [NF] in the Subject to [OT] - but, then I would NEVER have seen my own response - since I subscribe only to ProFoxTech!] -K- -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pete Theisen Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 9:31 PM Ken Kixmoeller (ProFox) wrote: Hi Ken, You didn't read it before deciding on your knee-jerk response, did you. It is about a fairly new computer program that raises your insurance premiums by a lot. If it were really monkeys, as opposed to programmers creating a program using monkey logic, I would agree that it would be [OT]. > [OT] -- --- - !! > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Michael Madigan <[email protected]> wrote: >> What about all the retard global warming jerkoffs? Remember when they said,. "Katrina was only the beginning". Find those "scientists" and shoot them for malpractice. >> >> --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Pete Theisen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> From: Pete Theisen <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [NF] Monkey Weather Science >>> Hi Everybody, >>> >>> http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20101114/ARTICLE/11141026/-1/todays paper?Title=Florida-insurers-rely-on-dubious-storm-model >>> >>> or >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/3xc8tn2 >>> >>> "brought four hand-picked scientists together in a Bermuda >>> hotel room. >>> >>> There, on a Saturday in October 2005, the company gathered >>> the >>> justification it needed to rewrite hurricane risk. Instead >>> of using 120 >>> years of history to calculate the average number of storms >>> each year, >>> RMS used the scientists' work as the basis for a new >>> crystal ball, a >>> computer model that would estimate storms for the next five >>> years. >>> >>> "The change created an $82 billion gap between the money >>> insurers had >>> and what they needed, a hole they spent the next five years >>> trying to >>> fill with rate increases and policy cancellations. >>> >>> "RMS said the change that drove Florida property insurance >>> bills to >>> record highs was based on "scientific consensus." >>> >>> "The reality was quite different. >>> >>> "Today, two of the four scientists present that day no >>> longer support >>> the hurricane estimates they helped generate. Neither do >>> two other >>> scientists involved in later revisions. One says that >>> monkeys could do >>> as well." >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pete _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/289ea162f5642645b5cf64d624c66a1409df1...@us-ny-mail-002.waitex.net ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
