<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_07_1858223</id>
	<title>Sunspots Return</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1246995060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>We're <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530275,00.html">emerging from the longest, deepest sunspot drought</a> since 1913 (we <a href="//science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/09/1414205&amp;tid=160">discussed its depths</a> here) with the appearance of a robust group of sunspots over the weekend. Recently we discussed <a href="//science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/17/2218225&amp;tid=236">a possible explanation</a> for the prolonged minimum. The Fox News article quotes observer Michael Buxton of Ocean Beach, Calif.: "This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years." jamie found a NASA site where you can <a href="http://sohodata.nascom.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/soho\_movie\_theater">generate a movie of the recent sunspot's movement</a> &mdash; try selecting the first image type and bumping the resolution to 1024. The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're emerging from the longest , deepest sunspot drought since 1913 ( we discussed its depths here ) with the appearance of a robust group of sunspots over the weekend .
Recently we discussed a possible explanation for the prolonged minimum .
The Fox News article quotes observer Michael Buxton of Ocean Beach , Calif. : " This is the best sunspot I 've seen in two years .
" jamie found a NASA site where you can generate a movie of the recent sunspot 's movement    try selecting the first image type and bumping the resolution to 1024 .
The magnetic field lines are clearly visible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're emerging from the longest, deepest sunspot drought since 1913 (we discussed its depths here) with the appearance of a robust group of sunspots over the weekend.
Recently we discussed a possible explanation for the prolonged minimum.
The Fox News article quotes observer Michael Buxton of Ocean Beach, Calif.: "This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years.
" jamie found a NASA site where you can generate a movie of the recent sunspot's movement — try selecting the first image type and bumping the resolution to 1024.
The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614793</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>IamX</author>
	<datestamp>1246964400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field. Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines."</p><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field\_line" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] </p></div><p>Magnetic fields are continuous in what sense?  mathematically continuous or some other sense that has not been stated?
We have not seen anything continuous in our physical reality/this universe yet.

also who and by what principle/fact/logic/data one can state<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:"Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines" ? without defining a) what is meant by continuous?
b)How that conclusion came to be? and why did he/she stop there? they should have also added "God is Love" it just blends right in.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field .
Magnetic fields are continuous , and do not have discrete lines .
" Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] Magnetic fields are continuous in what sense ?
mathematically continuous or some other sense that has not been stated ?
We have not seen anything continuous in our physical reality/this universe yet .
also who and by what principle/fact/logic/data one can state : " Magnetic fields are continuous , and do not have discrete lines " ?
without defining a ) what is meant by continuous ?
b ) How that conclusion came to be ?
and why did he/she stop there ?
they should have also added " God is Love " it just blends right in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field.
Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines.
" Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] Magnetic fields are continuous in what sense?
mathematically continuous or some other sense that has not been stated?
We have not seen anything continuous in our physical reality/this universe yet.
also who and by what principle/fact/logic/data one can state :"Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines" ?
without defining a) what is meant by continuous?
b)How that conclusion came to be?
and why did he/she stop there?
they should have also added "God is Love" it just blends right in.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614459</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1246962960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, I had it backwards. It is a positive correlation, not a negative one. But not for the reasons you mention. The sunspot activity tends to blow away the solar winds, allowing more radiation to get through to Earth's surface.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I had it backwards .
It is a positive correlation , not a negative one .
But not for the reasons you mention .
The sunspot activity tends to blow away the solar winds , allowing more radiation to get through to Earth 's surface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I had it backwards.
It is a positive correlation, not a negative one.
But not for the reasons you mention.
The sunspot activity tends to blow away the solar winds, allowing more radiation to get through to Earth's surface.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613901</id>
	<title>Re:Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1246960860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's you and where you live. Where I live (Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA) we had an unusually warm and dry winter, and are currently in the middle of a slightly hot and unusually humid summer.<br> <br>

I don't like it one bit. Our moisture is supposed to come from melting snow in the mountains...not torrential downpours ruining cars, roofs and vegetation with hail and flooding roads because the ground is too dry and hard to absorb all that at once.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's you and where you live .
Where I live ( Albuquerque , New Mexico , USA ) we had an unusually warm and dry winter , and are currently in the middle of a slightly hot and unusually humid summer .
I do n't like it one bit .
Our moisture is supposed to come from melting snow in the mountains...not torrential downpours ruining cars , roofs and vegetation with hail and flooding roads because the ground is too dry and hard to absorb all that at once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's you and where you live.
Where I live (Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA) we had an unusually warm and dry winter, and are currently in the middle of a slightly hot and unusually humid summer.
I don't like it one bit.
Our moisture is supposed to come from melting snow in the mountains...not torrential downpours ruining cars, roofs and vegetation with hail and flooding roads because the ground is too dry and hard to absorb all that at once.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613713</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246960080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not try it at home. Looking at sunspots through a 'scope is gonna hurt your eyes. The BJ too, if  you consider it like masturbation by a second party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not try it at home .
Looking at sunspots through a 'scope is gon na hurt your eyes .
The BJ too , if you consider it like masturbation by a second party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not try it at home.
Looking at sunspots through a 'scope is gonna hurt your eyes.
The BJ too, if  you consider it like masturbation by a second party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28754357</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>khayman80</author>
	<datestamp>1248089220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry for being offtopic, but I don't know how to reach you except via a Slashdot comment.</p><p>I just wrote a <a href="http://dumbscientist.com/archives/abrupt-climate-change" title="dumbscientist.com">brief article</a> [dumbscientist.com] on climate change that quotes <em>some</em> of your insightful and helpful comments to me in the past.</p><p>I'm scared that this article will be filled up with rude people insulting me, or (MUCH worse) acolytes blindly believing in whatever I say. So if you see any mistakes in my reasoning or have any questions, please leave a comment at the form at the VERY bottom of the page. I'd like for the first couple of people who do that to be polite and capable of disagreeing agreeably. That's why I sent it to you first.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry for being offtopic , but I do n't know how to reach you except via a Slashdot comment.I just wrote a brief article [ dumbscientist.com ] on climate change that quotes some of your insightful and helpful comments to me in the past.I 'm scared that this article will be filled up with rude people insulting me , or ( MUCH worse ) acolytes blindly believing in whatever I say .
So if you see any mistakes in my reasoning or have any questions , please leave a comment at the form at the VERY bottom of the page .
I 'd like for the first couple of people who do that to be polite and capable of disagreeing agreeably .
That 's why I sent it to you first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry for being offtopic, but I don't know how to reach you except via a Slashdot comment.I just wrote a brief article [dumbscientist.com] on climate change that quotes some of your insightful and helpful comments to me in the past.I'm scared that this article will be filled up with rude people insulting me, or (MUCH worse) acolytes blindly believing in whatever I say.
So if you see any mistakes in my reasoning or have any questions, please leave a comment at the form at the VERY bottom of the page.
I'd like for the first couple of people who do that to be polite and capable of disagreeing agreeably.
That's why I sent it to you first.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613069</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613971</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246961100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up. (There is a <b>very</b> strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.</p></div><p>Nope.  People have been looking for correlations between sunspots and weather for years, but never found much.  If there's a correlation, it's weak.  <a href="http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/sunspots.php" title="noaa.gov">http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/sunspots.php</a> [noaa.gov]
</p><p>To the extent that there's any correlation, however, it tends to the the opposite of what you said-- positive correlation between sunspots and temperature, not negative.  The "Maunder Minimum" period of very few or no sunspots occurred about the same time as the "Little Ice Age" of <i>cold</i> temperatures.  (But note that a single period of low temperatures ocurring during a period of low sunspots, however extended, does not mean statistically significance).
</p><p>If that correlation were indeed true, then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures, and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words, that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw the tag but have n't seen this explicitly mentioned yet : one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up .
( There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.Nope .
People have been looking for correlations between sunspots and weather for years , but never found much .
If there 's a correlation , it 's weak .
http : //www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/sunspots.php [ noaa.gov ] To the extent that there 's any correlation , however , it tends to the the opposite of what you said-- positive correlation between sunspots and temperature , not negative .
The " Maunder Minimum " period of very few or no sunspots occurred about the same time as the " Little Ice Age " of cold temperatures .
( But note that a single period of low temperatures ocurring during a period of low sunspots , however extended , does not mean statistically significance ) .
If that correlation were indeed true , then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures , and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words , that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up.
(There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.Nope.
People have been looking for correlations between sunspots and weather for years, but never found much.
If there's a correlation, it's weak.
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/sunspots.php [noaa.gov]
To the extent that there's any correlation, however, it tends to the the opposite of what you said-- positive correlation between sunspots and temperature, not negative.
The "Maunder Minimum" period of very few or no sunspots occurred about the same time as the "Little Ice Age" of cold temperatures.
(But note that a single period of low temperatures ocurring during a period of low sunspots, however extended, does not mean statistically significance).
If that correlation were indeed true, then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures, and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words, that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614037</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>The\_Duck271</author>
	<datestamp>1246961340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IIRC, the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice age</p></div><p>No; during the little ice age there was ~50 years of almost no sunspots; we've only had ~2. There was a solar minimum earlier this century deeper than this one (unless this one goes on for a while yet).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC , the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this , earth was in the little ice ageNo ; during the little ice age there was ~ 50 years of almost no sunspots ; we 've only had ~ 2 .
There was a solar minimum earlier this century deeper than this one ( unless this one goes on for a while yet ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC, the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice ageNo; during the little ice age there was ~50 years of almost no sunspots; we've only had ~2.
There was a solar minimum earlier this century deeper than this one (unless this one goes on for a while yet).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612935</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1247000160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh sure...</p><p>Like ANY opinion Anonymous Cowards have about the so-called "Fox News" would be worth listening to.</p><p>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh sure...Like ANY opinion Anonymous Cowards have about the so-called " Fox News " would be worth listening to .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh sure...Like ANY opinion Anonymous Cowards have about the so-called "Fox News" would be worth listening to.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613285</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246958460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could you back this up with some data.  If anything, the inverse is true.  The last 50 years have seen a large increase in the number of sunspots per solar cycle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you back this up with some data .
If anything , the inverse is true .
The last 50 years have seen a large increase in the number of sunspots per solar cycle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you back this up with some data.
If anything, the inverse is true.
The last 50 years have seen a large increase in the number of sunspots per solar cycle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616005</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246971960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That scene would have played great if the gender roles had been reversed: Expert female hacker forced into sex, at gunpoint, by gangsters. Can be clearly heard saying "no" a couple of times. Hey, but in the end, she enjoyed it really, just like they all do.
<p>
Actually, the male rape is less offensive to me than the technical nonsense in the movie. That film only has two saving graces IMO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That scene would have played great if the gender roles had been reversed : Expert female hacker forced into sex , at gunpoint , by gangsters .
Can be clearly heard saying " no " a couple of times .
Hey , but in the end , she enjoyed it really , just like they all do .
Actually , the male rape is less offensive to me than the technical nonsense in the movie .
That film only has two saving graces IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That scene would have played great if the gender roles had been reversed: Expert female hacker forced into sex, at gunpoint, by gangsters.
Can be clearly heard saying "no" a couple of times.
Hey, but in the end, she enjoyed it really, just like they all do.
Actually, the male rape is less offensive to me than the technical nonsense in the movie.
That film only has two saving graces IMO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615383</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1246967700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quarter wave vertical on 20m, with a loading coil I can add for 40m.  50W (for licensing reasons) from my 30-year-old Trio TS-520.  Window-rattling reports all over Europe.  You don't need a big expensive setup to get out there.</p><p>Now, all I need to do is get my CW up to 25wpm...</p><p>73s, 2M0YEQ</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quarter wave vertical on 20m , with a loading coil I can add for 40m .
50W ( for licensing reasons ) from my 30-year-old Trio TS-520 .
Window-rattling reports all over Europe .
You do n't need a big expensive setup to get out there.Now , all I need to do is get my CW up to 25wpm...73s , 2M0YEQ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quarter wave vertical on 20m, with a loading coil I can add for 40m.
50W (for licensing reasons) from my 30-year-old Trio TS-520.
Window-rattling reports all over Europe.
You don't need a big expensive setup to get out there.Now, all I need to do is get my CW up to 25wpm...73s, 2M0YEQ</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613123</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</id>
	<title>Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>Spy Handler</author>
	<datestamp>1246958400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>IIRC, the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice age, and hundreds of millions of people died due to crops freezing, glaciers overrunning towns, disease, etc.<br> <br>

So maybe we're <b>supposed</b> to be in another little ice age, but all the greenhouse gases warmed the planet and saved us? <br> <br>

O\_\_\_\_O</htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC , the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this , earth was in the little ice age , and hundreds of millions of people died due to crops freezing , glaciers overrunning towns , disease , etc .
So maybe we 're supposed to be in another little ice age , but all the greenhouse gases warmed the planet and saved us ?
O \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC, the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice age, and hundreds of millions of people died due to crops freezing, glaciers overrunning towns, disease, etc.
So maybe we're supposed to be in another little ice age, but all the greenhouse gases warmed the planet and saved us?
O\_\_\_\_O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613765</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>patch0</author>
	<datestamp>1246960260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Almost right, the theory is in fact the reverse of your statement:

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3869753.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">linkage</a> [bbc.co.uk]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Almost right , the theory is in fact the reverse of your statement : linkage [ bbc.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Almost right, the theory is in fact the reverse of your statement:

linkage [bbc.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613125</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246957800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, is this code for masturbation?<br>
<br>
Just askin'</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , is this code for masturbation ?
Just askin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, is this code for masturbation?
Just askin'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861</id>
	<title>Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246999740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it just me and where I live or have last summer and winter been pretty warm while this current summer seems cooler with the return of the sun's spot ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)))</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me and where I live or have last summer and winter been pretty warm while this current summer seems cooler with the return of the sun 's spot ?
; - ) ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me and where I live or have last summer and winter been pretty warm while this current summer seems cooler with the return of the sun's spot ?
;-)))</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613559</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>fatboy</author>
	<datestamp>1246959480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sure glad to see ole' Sol is waking up again. I was surprised to make as many contacts as I did on field day, with just a simply wire loop thrown up in the trees.</p><p>--KE4PJW</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sure glad to see ole ' Sol is waking up again .
I was surprised to make as many contacts as I did on field day , with just a simply wire loop thrown up in the trees.--KE4PJW</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sure glad to see ole' Sol is waking up again.
I was surprised to make as many contacts as I did on field day, with just a simply wire loop thrown up in the trees.--KE4PJW</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614175</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246961760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I've been trying to find an answer to this question, and so far it looks like it is the other way around.</p><p>"Sunspots were rarely observed during the Maunder Minimum in the second part of the 17th Century. This coincides with the middle (and coldest) part of a period of cooling known as the Little Ice Age."<br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspot#Sunspot\_variation</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder\_Minimum</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 've been trying to find an answer to this question , and so far it looks like it is the other way around .
" Sunspots were rarely observed during the Maunder Minimum in the second part of the 17th Century .
This coincides with the middle ( and coldest ) part of a period of cooling known as the Little Ice Age .
" http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspot # Sunspot \ _variationhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder \ _Minimum</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I've been trying to find an answer to this question, and so far it looks like it is the other way around.
"Sunspots were rarely observed during the Maunder Minimum in the second part of the 17th Century.
This coincides with the middle (and coldest) part of a period of cooling known as the Little Ice Age.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspot#Sunspot\_variationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder\_Minimum</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613471</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1246959120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, I'm thinking GP might have it other-way-around. Sunspots are caused by violent electromagnetic activity on the sun; more active = hotter, or at least that is what I had heard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , I 'm thinking GP might have it other-way-around .
Sunspots are caused by violent electromagnetic activity on the sun ; more active = hotter , or at least that is what I had heard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, I'm thinking GP might have it other-way-around.
Sunspots are caused by violent electromagnetic activity on the sun; more active = hotter, or at least that is what I had heard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613031</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>mordors9</author>
	<datestamp>1246957440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You guys with your wacky theories that the Sun may affect our temperatures..</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys with your wacky theories that the Sun may affect our temperatures. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys with your wacky theories that the Sun may affect our temperatures..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613167</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Nautical Insanity</author>
	<datestamp>1246957920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.</i> </p><p>
Aha! So global warming is causing the sunspots to disappear!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth .
Aha ! So global warming is causing the sunspots to disappear !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.
Aha! So global warming is causing the sunspots to disappear!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615695</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246969560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, during the little ice age, we were able to monitor sunspots?  I don't think so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , during the little ice age , we were able to monitor sunspots ?
I do n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, during the little ice age, we were able to monitor sunspots?
I don't think so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613701</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>DriedClexler</author>
	<datestamp>1246960020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, if it helps you to understand it that way, sure, magnetic field lines are indeed imaginary.</p><p>Now, you just need to remember that electric field lines are real, since they make a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM\_wave#Properties" title="wikipedia.org">90 degree angle</a> [wikipedia.org] with magnetic field lines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , if it helps you to understand it that way , sure , magnetic field lines are indeed imaginary.Now , you just need to remember that electric field lines are real , since they make a 90 degree angle [ wikipedia.org ] with magnetic field lines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, if it helps you to understand it that way, sure, magnetic field lines are indeed imaginary.Now, you just need to remember that electric field lines are real, since they make a 90 degree angle [wikipedia.org] with magnetic field lines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613089</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1246957680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So is that physical law strong or biology strong?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So is that physical law strong or biology strong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So is that physical law strong or biology strong?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1247000160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Very strange, as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, they're quite real.  Being immaterial aspects of electro-magnetism,<br>they are, however, normally invisible.  Here, however, you can see the<br>superhot plasma flowing along them, much as you can get iron filings<br>on a piece of paper to do with an ordinary magnet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very strange , as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary.No , they 're quite real .
Being immaterial aspects of electro-magnetism,they are , however , normally invisible .
Here , however , you can see thesuperhot plasma flowing along them , much as you can get iron filingson a piece of paper to do with an ordinary magnet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very strange, as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary.No, they're quite real.
Being immaterial aspects of electro-magnetism,they are, however, normally invisible.
Here, however, you can see thesuperhot plasma flowing along them, much as you can get iron filingson a piece of paper to do with an ordinary magnet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613123</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246957740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Four elements on 15m, seven elements on 10m and two elements on 12m up at 85 feet -- plus 1500 Watts. It's about time I put a few more new ones in the log somewhere above 20!<br>I can hardly wait till CQWW this fall if conditions are this good or better. (Of course, I'm still hoping for a good season on 80 and 160 this winter, too!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Four elements on 15m , seven elements on 10m and two elements on 12m up at 85 feet -- plus 1500 Watts .
It 's about time I put a few more new ones in the log somewhere above 20 ! I can hardly wait till CQWW this fall if conditions are this good or better .
( Of course , I 'm still hoping for a good season on 80 and 160 this winter , too !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Four elements on 15m, seven elements on 10m and two elements on 12m up at 85 feet -- plus 1500 Watts.
It's about time I put a few more new ones in the log somewhere above 20!I can hardly wait till CQWW this fall if conditions are this good or better.
(Of course, I'm still hoping for a good season on 80 and 160 this winter, too!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613305</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>Etcetera</author>
	<datestamp>1246958520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science isn't really science at all. Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard. I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself, not a side effect of your belief in the science.</i></p> </div><p>This basically sums up the postmodern approach to science. When all truth is relative, then science itself has no basis for an exalted place in the hierarchy of rationality. With nothing to "prove" itself except itself, science becomes a rolling definition of "what works for me, today." From there, it's a small step to seeing science as a means, not an end... and specifically: a means of enacting social change.</p><p>Presto.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science is n't really science at all .
Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard .
I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself , not a side effect of your belief in the science .
This basically sums up the postmodern approach to science .
When all truth is relative , then science itself has no basis for an exalted place in the hierarchy of rationality .
With nothing to " prove " itself except itself , science becomes a rolling definition of " what works for me , today .
" From there , it 's a small step to seeing science as a means , not an end... and specifically : a means of enacting social change.Presto .
: /</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science isn't really science at all.
Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard.
I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself, not a side effect of your belief in the science.
This basically sums up the postmodern approach to science.
When all truth is relative, then science itself has no basis for an exalted place in the hierarchy of rationality.
With nothing to "prove" itself except itself, science becomes a rolling definition of "what works for me, today.
" From there, it's a small step to seeing science as a means, not an end... and specifically: a means of enacting social change.Presto.
:/
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613117</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1246957740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Look at the brightside he has new masturbation material to last him the next two years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the brightside he has new masturbation material to last him the next two years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the brightside he has new masturbation material to last him the next two years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615301</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246967220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You clearly have no idea what the hell you're talking about.  This current minimum is longer than expected by only about 1.5 years now.  It's called the Solar Sunspot Cycle, look it up.  Between the mid 1600s and early 1700s was a period of about *70 years* where almost no sunspot activity was seen.  Do you know what this caused?  A drop in London's average temperature of about half a degree Celsius.  That's a far cry from your hundreds of millions of dying people eating frozen corn while being trampled over by runaway glaciers that give them the plague.  Maybe do a little research before you post stupid crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You clearly have no idea what the hell you 're talking about .
This current minimum is longer than expected by only about 1.5 years now .
It 's called the Solar Sunspot Cycle , look it up .
Between the mid 1600s and early 1700s was a period of about * 70 years * where almost no sunspot activity was seen .
Do you know what this caused ?
A drop in London 's average temperature of about half a degree Celsius .
That 's a far cry from your hundreds of millions of dying people eating frozen corn while being trampled over by runaway glaciers that give them the plague .
Maybe do a little research before you post stupid crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You clearly have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
This current minimum is longer than expected by only about 1.5 years now.
It's called the Solar Sunspot Cycle, look it up.
Between the mid 1600s and early 1700s was a period of about *70 years* where almost no sunspot activity was seen.
Do you know what this caused?
A drop in London's average temperature of about half a degree Celsius.
That's a far cry from your hundreds of millions of dying people eating frozen corn while being trampled over by runaway glaciers that give them the plague.
Maybe do a little research before you post stupid crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612849</id>
	<title>What I'd like to know is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246999680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who tagged this NSFW. Seriously.</p><p>It's nice to see the new solar cycle is flaring up. I miss those nice auroras we could this during the last solar peak. Haven't seen one in about 3 years now. Some were so bright that you could see them in the city, very early in the evening.(at 56&#194;N Magnetic Latitude).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who tagged this NSFW .
Seriously.It 's nice to see the new solar cycle is flaring up .
I miss those nice auroras we could this during the last solar peak .
Have n't seen one in about 3 years now .
Some were so bright that you could see them in the city , very early in the evening .
( at 56   N Magnetic Latitude ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who tagged this NSFW.
Seriously.It's nice to see the new solar cycle is flaring up.
I miss those nice auroras we could this during the last solar peak.
Haven't seen one in about 3 years now.
Some were so bright that you could see them in the city, very early in the evening.
(at 56ÂN Magnetic Latitude).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614117</id>
	<title>Re:Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1246961580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because local climate suddenly equates to global mean temperature?  Huh... go figure...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because local climate suddenly equates to global mean temperature ?
Huh... go figure.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because local climate suddenly equates to global mean temperature?
Huh... go figure...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637</id>
	<title>Oh sure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246998900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called "sun" would be worth listening to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called " sun " would be worth listening to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called "sun" would be worth listening to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612797</id>
	<title>Alright....</title>
	<author>Em Emalb</author>
	<datestamp>1246999440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who embarrassed the sun this time?  Don't you people know how awkward the sun feels when you make fun of it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who embarrassed the sun this time ?
Do n't you people know how awkward the sun feels when you make fun of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who embarrassed the sun this time?
Don't you people know how awkward the sun feels when you make fun of it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618095</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>RadioOfficer</author>
	<datestamp>1246990440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You said it, I was beginning to despair...

73
EI4HQ</htmltext>
<tokenext>You said it , I was beginning to despair.. . 73 EI4HQ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You said it, I was beginning to despair...

73
EI4HQ</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612995</id>
	<title>It's actually not much of a sunspot group.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1246957260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go check it out at <a href="http://www.solarcycle24.com/" title="solarcycle24.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.solarcycle24.com/</a> [solarcycle24.com]</p><p>This guy's everything about the sun that one can track.   In particular, he has an image of the sun on the upper left hand corner that shows how pathetic this sunspot group.</p><p>I wouldn't say the sunspot drought is over, until there is sustained progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go check it out at http : //www.solarcycle24.com/ [ solarcycle24.com ] This guy 's everything about the sun that one can track .
In particular , he has an image of the sun on the upper left hand corner that shows how pathetic this sunspot group.I would n't say the sunspot drought is over , until there is sustained progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go check it out at http://www.solarcycle24.com/ [solarcycle24.com]This guy's everything about the sun that one can track.
In particular, he has an image of the sun on the upper left hand corner that shows how pathetic this sunspot group.I wouldn't say the sunspot drought is over, until there is sustained progress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619453</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247051700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice age"</p><p>According to TFA the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this was in 1913. I don't think there was a little ice age in 1913.<br>This minimum has so far lasted like 1 or 2 years, and i'm pretty sure the even a "little" ice age lasts longer than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this , earth was in the little ice age " According to TFA the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this was in 1913 .
I do n't think there was a little ice age in 1913.This minimum has so far lasted like 1 or 2 years , and i 'm pretty sure the even a " little " ice age lasts longer than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this, earth was in the little ice age"According to TFA the last time sunspots were at a minimum like this was in 1913.
I don't think there was a little ice age in 1913.This minimum has so far lasted like 1 or 2 years, and i'm pretty sure the even a "little" ice age lasts longer than that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624157</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247074920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, come on. Hugh is being threatened at gunpoint with a one minute deadline (literally), not to mention being forced to act out a ludicrous hacking scene, but the part that really bugs you is how horribly evil that Halle Berry is giving him a blowjob? Rhyder, if you are a male, do us all a favor and turn in your testicles at the nearest hospital.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , come on .
Hugh is being threatened at gunpoint with a one minute deadline ( literally ) , not to mention being forced to act out a ludicrous hacking scene , but the part that really bugs you is how horribly evil that Halle Berry is giving him a blowjob ?
Rhyder , if you are a male , do us all a favor and turn in your testicles at the nearest hospital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, come on.
Hugh is being threatened at gunpoint with a one minute deadline (literally), not to mention being forced to act out a ludicrous hacking scene, but the part that really bugs you is how horribly evil that Halle Berry is giving him a blowjob?
Rhyder, if you are a male, do us all a favor and turn in your testicles at the nearest hospital.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624231</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1247075160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hundreds of millions of high-footprint humans dying would be bad in which way, exactly?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hundreds of millions of high-footprint humans dying would be bad in which way , exactly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hundreds of millions of high-footprint humans dying would be bad in which way, exactly?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613327</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246958580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The iron filings in the photo appear to be aligning themselves with discrete field lines, but in actuality, they are creating the field lines by concentrating the magnetic field along a random topographic path, and not along any line that actually exists in the field. In other words, the lines formed by the iron filings would not exist without the iron filings, and so the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field. Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines."</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field\_line" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The iron filings in the photo appear to be aligning themselves with discrete field lines , but in actuality , they are creating the field lines by concentrating the magnetic field along a random topographic path , and not along any line that actually exists in the field .
In other words , the lines formed by the iron filings would not exist without the iron filings , and so the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field .
Magnetic fields are continuous , and do not have discrete lines .
" Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The iron filings in the photo appear to be aligning themselves with discrete field lines, but in actuality, they are creating the field lines by concentrating the magnetic field along a random topographic path, and not along any line that actually exists in the field.
In other words, the lines formed by the iron filings would not exist without the iron filings, and so the magnetic field lines you see are a not a demonstration of a lines in the magnetic field.
Magnetic fields are continuous, and do not have discrete lines.
"Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613203</id>
	<title>Re:CQ DX</title>
	<author>AB3A</author>
	<datestamp>1246958100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DX from the other side of the earth on 10 meters at 1 AM?  I remember those days.  Now if only we could find a way to get the LIDS to learn how to troll the Internet, why we might actually have a civilized conversation on the air!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DX from the other side of the earth on 10 meters at 1 AM ?
I remember those days .
Now if only we could find a way to get the LIDS to learn how to troll the Internet , why we might actually have a civilized conversation on the air !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DX from the other side of the earth on 10 meters at 1 AM?
I remember those days.
Now if only we could find a way to get the LIDS to learn how to troll the Internet, why we might actually have a civilized conversation on the air!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613579</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>NotNormallyNormal</author>
	<datestamp>1246959540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Magnetic field LINES are a mathematical construct. The magnetic field is real. Iron filings and plasma etc simply flow in the field. If there were lines, what would be between the lines? There could not be more lines. Therefore it is a continuous field. Iron filings simply represent that field.</p><p>Plasma on the other hand is an entirely different case because it is made up of charged particles. Plasma is therefore affected by the electric field as well as magnetic field. In fact, plasma flows with the rules of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamics" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">magnetohydrodynamics.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Magnetic field LINES are a mathematical construct .
The magnetic field is real .
Iron filings and plasma etc simply flow in the field .
If there were lines , what would be between the lines ?
There could not be more lines .
Therefore it is a continuous field .
Iron filings simply represent that field.Plasma on the other hand is an entirely different case because it is made up of charged particles .
Plasma is therefore affected by the electric field as well as magnetic field .
In fact , plasma flows with the rules of magnetohydrodynamics .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Magnetic field LINES are a mathematical construct.
The magnetic field is real.
Iron filings and plasma etc simply flow in the field.
If there were lines, what would be between the lines?
There could not be more lines.
Therefore it is a continuous field.
Iron filings simply represent that field.Plasma on the other hand is an entirely different case because it is made up of charged particles.
Plasma is therefore affected by the electric field as well as magnetic field.
In fact, plasma flows with the rules of magnetohydrodynamics.
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614573</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1246963500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are multiple cycles at work, not just the famous 10.7 year cycle. But even that cycle is highly variable... and actually that is the point: it is the LENGTH of the cycles that correspond to temperature, not the amplitude. And we have had some pretty long cycles just lately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are multiple cycles at work , not just the famous 10.7 year cycle .
But even that cycle is highly variable... and actually that is the point : it is the LENGTH of the cycles that correspond to temperature , not the amplitude .
And we have had some pretty long cycles just lately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are multiple cycles at work, not just the famous 10.7 year cycle.
But even that cycle is highly variable... and actually that is the point: it is the LENGTH of the cycles that correspond to temperature, not the amplitude.
And we have had some pretty long cycles just lately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613755</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1246960260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some interesting data available on Earth's albedo (reflectivity): <a href="http://earth.myfastforum.org/sutra1069.php" title="myfastforum.org">http://earth.myfastforum.org/sutra1069.php</a> [myfastforum.org]  Check out the linked sources, in particular.</p><p>Summary:  there is some evidence that Earth's albedo has decreased by as much as 2\% (absolute, almost 10\% relative) in the past twenty years.  A decrease in albedo means less visible light is being reflected by the planet, implying that more is being absorbed, which would tend to increase planetary heat content.)</p><p>A 2.0\% variation in albedo is huge:  over twice the effect of all anthropogenic greenhouse gases combined (6.8 W/m**2 vs about 5 W/m**2).  However, because much of the change is due to changes in cloud cover, one must also account for the changes in infrared absorption from different kinds of clouds, which makes a head-to-head comparison tricky.  However, while the effect of different types of cloud cover can reduce the effect of albedo variations, the residual is still as large or larger than current estimates of human greenhouse gas contributions to climate forcing.</p><p>Final grain of salt:  albedo is a physically meaningful term, unlike "global average temperature", but it is still very tricky to measure, and therefore these results should be taken with a grain of salt.  However, the magnitude of the effect is such that it is difficult--but not impossible--to imagine it not having a pretty major influence on climate.</p><p>Cloud cover maybe correlated with cosmic ray flux, which may be correlated with sunspot activity.</p><p>Based on the data we have, it appears Earth's albedo has been anomalously low in the past decade or more, and may now be popping back up to something closer to the long term average (0.315 as opposed to as low as 0.305 in the past decade).  If that is the case, then we can expect to see a pronounced drop in "global average temperature" in the next few years.</p><p>If that happens, then climate forcing due to albedo variation is going to start looking pretty plausible as a significant cause of the high "global average temperatures" seen in the past decade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some interesting data available on Earth 's albedo ( reflectivity ) : http : //earth.myfastforum.org/sutra1069.php [ myfastforum.org ] Check out the linked sources , in particular.Summary : there is some evidence that Earth 's albedo has decreased by as much as 2 \ % ( absolute , almost 10 \ % relative ) in the past twenty years .
A decrease in albedo means less visible light is being reflected by the planet , implying that more is being absorbed , which would tend to increase planetary heat content .
) A 2.0 \ % variation in albedo is huge : over twice the effect of all anthropogenic greenhouse gases combined ( 6.8 W/m * * 2 vs about 5 W/m * * 2 ) .
However , because much of the change is due to changes in cloud cover , one must also account for the changes in infrared absorption from different kinds of clouds , which makes a head-to-head comparison tricky .
However , while the effect of different types of cloud cover can reduce the effect of albedo variations , the residual is still as large or larger than current estimates of human greenhouse gas contributions to climate forcing.Final grain of salt : albedo is a physically meaningful term , unlike " global average temperature " , but it is still very tricky to measure , and therefore these results should be taken with a grain of salt .
However , the magnitude of the effect is such that it is difficult--but not impossible--to imagine it not having a pretty major influence on climate.Cloud cover maybe correlated with cosmic ray flux , which may be correlated with sunspot activity.Based on the data we have , it appears Earth 's albedo has been anomalously low in the past decade or more , and may now be popping back up to something closer to the long term average ( 0.315 as opposed to as low as 0.305 in the past decade ) .
If that is the case , then we can expect to see a pronounced drop in " global average temperature " in the next few years.If that happens , then climate forcing due to albedo variation is going to start looking pretty plausible as a significant cause of the high " global average temperatures " seen in the past decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some interesting data available on Earth's albedo (reflectivity): http://earth.myfastforum.org/sutra1069.php [myfastforum.org]  Check out the linked sources, in particular.Summary:  there is some evidence that Earth's albedo has decreased by as much as 2\% (absolute, almost 10\% relative) in the past twenty years.
A decrease in albedo means less visible light is being reflected by the planet, implying that more is being absorbed, which would tend to increase planetary heat content.
)A 2.0\% variation in albedo is huge:  over twice the effect of all anthropogenic greenhouse gases combined (6.8 W/m**2 vs about 5 W/m**2).
However, because much of the change is due to changes in cloud cover, one must also account for the changes in infrared absorption from different kinds of clouds, which makes a head-to-head comparison tricky.
However, while the effect of different types of cloud cover can reduce the effect of albedo variations, the residual is still as large or larger than current estimates of human greenhouse gas contributions to climate forcing.Final grain of salt:  albedo is a physically meaningful term, unlike "global average temperature", but it is still very tricky to measure, and therefore these results should be taken with a grain of salt.
However, the magnitude of the effect is such that it is difficult--but not impossible--to imagine it not having a pretty major influence on climate.Cloud cover maybe correlated with cosmic ray flux, which may be correlated with sunspot activity.Based on the data we have, it appears Earth's albedo has been anomalously low in the past decade or more, and may now be popping back up to something closer to the long term average (0.315 as opposed to as low as 0.305 in the past decade).
If that is the case, then we can expect to see a pronounced drop in "global average temperature" in the next few years.If that happens, then climate forcing due to albedo variation is going to start looking pretty plausible as a significant cause of the high "global average temperatures" seen in the past decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614171</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>drerwk</author>
	<datestamp>1246961760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A plane is continuous, and it is made up of an infinite number of discrete lines. Just like there are an infinite number of latitude lines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A plane is continuous , and it is made up of an infinite number of discrete lines .
Just like there are an infinite number of latitude lines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A plane is continuous, and it is made up of an infinite number of discrete lines.
Just like there are an infinite number of latitude lines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615967</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246971360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place, throw in some Kyoto claims, that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one, they will lay claim to proof they were right.</p><p>In other words, the salesmen won.  No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves.  In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes.</p></div><p>If the outcome is a repeat of the little ice age, the claim will be interesting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place , throw in some Kyoto claims , that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one , they will lay claim to proof they were right.In other words , the salesmen won .
No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves .
In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes.If the outcome is a repeat of the little ice age , the claim will be interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place, throw in some Kyoto claims, that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one, they will lay claim to proof they were right.In other words, the salesmen won.
No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves.
In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes.If the outcome is a repeat of the little ice age, the claim will be interesting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614553</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>jdgeorge</author>
	<datestamp>1246963440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To the best of my knowledge, nobody is predicting a long-term cooling trend based on any activity promoted by those in favor of reducing and managing carbon dioxide emissions. The intent of those efforts (whether or not they succeed) is to slow down or halt the long term warming trend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To the best of my knowledge , nobody is predicting a long-term cooling trend based on any activity promoted by those in favor of reducing and managing carbon dioxide emissions .
The intent of those efforts ( whether or not they succeed ) is to slow down or halt the long term warming trend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To the best of my knowledge, nobody is predicting a long-term cooling trend based on any activity promoted by those in favor of reducing and managing carbon dioxide emissions.
The intent of those efforts (whether or not they succeed) is to slow down or halt the long term warming trend.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659</id>
	<title>"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible. "</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1246998900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very strange, as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very strange , as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very strange, as magnetic field lines are entirely imaginary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28621265</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Again, could you please tell me which trend to worry about ?</p><p>The last 10 years there has been a -large- cooling trend (more temp difference in 10 years than global warming produces in 200 years), next year (or -perhaps- the year after) should be the coldest point in this trend, after which temp should go back up<br>The last 200 years, there has been a -tiny- warming trend ("global warming").<br>The last 800 years (since the "little ice age") there has been a -quite large- warming trend<br>The last 9000 years there has been a massive warming trend. Since -just about the start of human civilization give or take 100 years- temperature has risen almost 15 degrees worldwide.<br>The last 20000 years there has been a -huge- cooling trend, and, worse, it is part of a pattern that seems to suggest temperature will drop 15 degrees worldwide (to just 5 degrees celcius) between now and -oh- another 10.000 years or-so<br>The last 200000 years there has been a series of warming-cooling, again suggesting temperature is getting ready to drop quickly</p><p>So, tell me, clearly I should panic. But why ? Because it's going to warm or because it's going to cool ? If you calculate the energy involved, it is a ridiculous suggesting that we would be able to do anything about it.</p><p>One other historical point : a three degree drop in temperature was responsible for several <i>western</i> cities to starve <i>to the last man</i>. A three degree gain in temperature, later on, was almost certainly responsible for a quadrupling of agricultural capacity.</p><p>Therefore if climate is to change, pray to God that the temperature rises. We humans -and every other plant and animal except perhaps reptiles- do VERY well in warm climates, and VERY poor in cold climates. That includes average worldwide temperatures ten degrees above what we have today : humans thrive in those conditions. Temperature even a mere 3 degrees below what we have today, and everything north of New York becomes uninhabitable. If temperature drops 3 degrees Canada will cease to exist in a matter of years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Again , could you please tell me which trend to worry about ? The last 10 years there has been a -large- cooling trend ( more temp difference in 10 years than global warming produces in 200 years ) , next year ( or -perhaps- the year after ) should be the coldest point in this trend , after which temp should go back upThe last 200 years , there has been a -tiny- warming trend ( " global warming " ) .The last 800 years ( since the " little ice age " ) there has been a -quite large- warming trendThe last 9000 years there has been a massive warming trend .
Since -just about the start of human civilization give or take 100 years- temperature has risen almost 15 degrees worldwide.The last 20000 years there has been a -huge- cooling trend , and , worse , it is part of a pattern that seems to suggest temperature will drop 15 degrees worldwide ( to just 5 degrees celcius ) between now and -oh- another 10.000 years or-soThe last 200000 years there has been a series of warming-cooling , again suggesting temperature is getting ready to drop quicklySo , tell me , clearly I should panic .
But why ?
Because it 's going to warm or because it 's going to cool ?
If you calculate the energy involved , it is a ridiculous suggesting that we would be able to do anything about it.One other historical point : a three degree drop in temperature was responsible for several western cities to starve to the last man .
A three degree gain in temperature , later on , was almost certainly responsible for a quadrupling of agricultural capacity.Therefore if climate is to change , pray to God that the temperature rises .
We humans -and every other plant and animal except perhaps reptiles- do VERY well in warm climates , and VERY poor in cold climates .
That includes average worldwide temperatures ten degrees above what we have today : humans thrive in those conditions .
Temperature even a mere 3 degrees below what we have today , and everything north of New York becomes uninhabitable .
If temperature drops 3 degrees Canada will cease to exist in a matter of years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Again, could you please tell me which trend to worry about ?The last 10 years there has been a -large- cooling trend (more temp difference in 10 years than global warming produces in 200 years), next year (or -perhaps- the year after) should be the coldest point in this trend, after which temp should go back upThe last 200 years, there has been a -tiny- warming trend ("global warming").The last 800 years (since the "little ice age") there has been a -quite large- warming trendThe last 9000 years there has been a massive warming trend.
Since -just about the start of human civilization give or take 100 years- temperature has risen almost 15 degrees worldwide.The last 20000 years there has been a -huge- cooling trend, and, worse, it is part of a pattern that seems to suggest temperature will drop 15 degrees worldwide (to just 5 degrees celcius) between now and -oh- another 10.000 years or-soThe last 200000 years there has been a series of warming-cooling, again suggesting temperature is getting ready to drop quicklySo, tell me, clearly I should panic.
But why ?
Because it's going to warm or because it's going to cool ?
If you calculate the energy involved, it is a ridiculous suggesting that we would be able to do anything about it.One other historical point : a three degree drop in temperature was responsible for several western cities to starve to the last man.
A three degree gain in temperature, later on, was almost certainly responsible for a quadrupling of agricultural capacity.Therefore if climate is to change, pray to God that the temperature rises.
We humans -and every other plant and animal except perhaps reptiles- do VERY well in warm climates, and VERY poor in cold climates.
That includes average worldwide temperatures ten degrees above what we have today : humans thrive in those conditions.
Temperature even a mere 3 degrees below what we have today, and everything north of New York becomes uninhabitable.
If temperature drops 3 degrees Canada will cease to exist in a matter of years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246957920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what, the last 50 years of steady warming, during which multiple sunspot cycles occurred, isn't enough for you?  Or are you just a big fan of cherry-picking data to support your pet conclusions?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what , the last 50 years of steady warming , during which multiple sunspot cycles occurred , is n't enough for you ?
Or are you just a big fan of cherry-picking data to support your pet conclusions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what, the last 50 years of steady warming, during which multiple sunspot cycles occurred, isn't enough for you?
Or are you just a big fan of cherry-picking data to support your pet conclusions?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28650647</id>
	<title>Re:Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247244060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ever since asking a question and making an assertion are the same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever since asking a question and making an assertion are the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever since asking a question and making an assertion are the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</id>
	<title>Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1246957320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place, throw in some Kyoto claims, that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one, they will lay claim to proof they were right.</p><p>In other words, the salesmen won.  No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves.  In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place , throw in some Kyoto claims , that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one , they will lay claim to proof they were right.In other words , the salesmen won .
No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves .
In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I betcha that if Congress gets Cap and Trade in place, throw in some Kyoto claims, that in a few years if we see a cooling trend beyond our current one, they will lay claim to proof they were right.In other words, the salesmen won.
No matter the out come they will claim to have proven themselves.
In the end all we get will be more embedded taxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615177</id>
	<title>Re:Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1246966260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just you - here in the Pacific Northwet, it's been exactly the opposite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just you - here in the Pacific Northwet , it 's been exactly the opposite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just you - here in the Pacific Northwet, it's been exactly the opposite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618233</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1246992420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no bro, it just mean you have a dirty cone!  Now go wash it and try again you filthy scientists!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no bro , it just mean you have a dirty cone !
Now go wash it and try again you filthy scientists !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no bro, it just mean you have a dirty cone!
Now go wash it and try again you filthy scientists!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614413</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1246962780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the temp doesn't drop, then Obama will blaim it on Bush, just like everything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the temp does n't drop , then Obama will blaim it on Bush , just like everything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the temp doesn't drop, then Obama will blaim it on Bush, just like everything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612831</id>
	<title>skin marks</title>
	<author>pig-power</author>
	<datestamp>1246999620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bet you were pretty happy to hear this.<br>
The marks on your skin that looked like sunspots...<br>
turned out to be rings around Uranus!<br>
zing</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet you were pretty happy to hear this .
The marks on your skin that looked like sunspots.. . turned out to be rings around Uranus !
zing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet you were pretty happy to hear this.
The marks on your skin that looked like sunspots...
turned out to be rings around Uranus!
zing</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691</id>
	<title>CQ DX</title>
	<author>Nethead</author>
	<datestamp>1246999020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CQ DX here we come!  Time to hang wire and pound brass!</p><p>73, w7com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CQ DX here we come !
Time to hang wire and pound brass ! 73 , w7com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CQ DX here we come!
Time to hang wire and pound brass!73, w7com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612845</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246999680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not visible != imaginary. Magnetic lines very much exist, as any kid who has played with a magnet and iron filings can tell you.</p><p>Amusingly, my captcha is arrogant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not visible ! = imaginary .
Magnetic lines very much exist , as any kid who has played with a magnet and iron filings can tell you.Amusingly , my captcha is arrogant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not visible != imaginary.
Magnetic lines very much exist, as any kid who has played with a magnet and iron filings can tell you.Amusingly, my captcha is arrogant</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1246958340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years."</p></div><p>... MAN does this guy need to get laid.</p><p>For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is the best sunspot I 've seen in two years. " .. .
MAN does this guy need to get laid.For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years."...
MAN does this guy need to get laid.For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616419</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>Aluvus</author>
	<datestamp>1246975080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suppose that such a cooling trend were to occur mainly because of Cap and Trade and friends, but sunspot activity coincidentally changed over the same period.  How loudly do you think certain individuals would declare that it was all sunspots all along?</p><p>Or perhaps it is only the people that disagree with you that can be irrational fools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose that such a cooling trend were to occur mainly because of Cap and Trade and friends , but sunspot activity coincidentally changed over the same period .
How loudly do you think certain individuals would declare that it was all sunspots all along ? Or perhaps it is only the people that disagree with you that can be irrational fools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose that such a cooling trend were to occur mainly because of Cap and Trade and friends, but sunspot activity coincidentally changed over the same period.
How loudly do you think certain individuals would declare that it was all sunspots all along?Or perhaps it is only the people that disagree with you that can be irrational fools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612901</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1246999980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun? Didn't they go out of business or something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun ?
Did n't they go out of business or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun?
Didn't they go out of business or something?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613239</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1246958280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anonymous Coward: ready to doubt that shiny yellow thing is really the "sun", for no reason other than Fox News said it was.</p><p>Yeah, everything Fox says is automatically false.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous Coward : ready to doubt that shiny yellow thing is really the " sun " , for no reason other than Fox News said it was.Yeah , everything Fox says is automatically false .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous Coward: ready to doubt that shiny yellow thing is really the "sun", for no reason other than Fox News said it was.Yeah, everything Fox says is automatically false.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613115</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Em Emalb</author>
	<datestamp>1246957740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up.</i></p><p>Round here, it's been the mildest summer temperature-wise in a long time.</p><p>(DC area)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw the tag but have n't seen this explicitly mentioned yet : one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up.Round here , it 's been the mildest summer temperature-wise in a long time .
( DC area )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up.Round here, it's been the mildest summer temperature-wise in a long time.
(DC area)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618675</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1247083920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard"
<br> <br>
Rubbish, if you don't question the validity of the question then we end up teaching creation science and every other crackpot theory in schools because some institute with absolutely no scientific standing has questioned evolutionary theory, heliocentric theory, germ theory, or some other theory that they don't like. When this happens it is no longer science, it's mearly uninformed opinion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard " Rubbish , if you do n't question the validity of the question then we end up teaching creation science and every other crackpot theory in schools because some institute with absolutely no scientific standing has questioned evolutionary theory , heliocentric theory , germ theory , or some other theory that they do n't like .
When this happens it is no longer science , it 's mearly uninformed opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard"
 
Rubbish, if you don't question the validity of the question then we end up teaching creation science and every other crackpot theory in schools because some institute with absolutely no scientific standing has questioned evolutionary theory, heliocentric theory, germ theory, or some other theory that they don't like.
When this happens it is no longer science, it's mearly uninformed opinion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618511</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246995300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I betcha..........Palin are you  Shivetya?????one-t-eleven!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I betcha..........Palin are you Shivetya ? ? ? ?
? one-t-eleven !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I betcha..........Palin are you  Shivetya????
?one-t-eleven!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919</id>
	<title>Re:Oh sure...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247000100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called "sun" would be worth listening to.</i> <br> <br>If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science isn't really science at all. Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard. I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself, not a side effect of your belief in the science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called " sun " would be worth listening to .
If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science is n't really science at all .
Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard .
I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself , not a side effect of your belief in the science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>like ANYTHING Fox News allegedly reports about the so-called "sun" would be worth listening to.
If you have to censor some from speaking out about science for fear of the scrutiny maybe your science isn't really science at all.
Anyone who questions the validity of a theory should be heard.
I know that there will be those who will try to mock you but the science is the truth in and of itself, not a side effect of your belief in the science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28617869</id>
	<title>Re:Will it really matter?</title>
	<author>BeerCur</author>
	<datestamp>1246988100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it gets us off Oil, I'm all in favor of more "embedded taxes" being imposed. Imagine not having to give a flying carpet ride about the Middle East and the tax savings / spending that would provide... Wot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it gets us off Oil , I 'm all in favor of more " embedded taxes " being imposed .
Imagine not having to give a flying carpet ride about the Middle East and the tax savings / spending that would provide... Wot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it gets us off Oil, I'm all in favor of more "embedded taxes" being imposed.
Imagine not having to give a flying carpet ride about the Middle East and the tax savings / spending that would provide... Wot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612777</id>
	<title>We're all gonna die!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246999380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread478278/pg1</p><p>Another New Crop Circle Predicts July 7th 2009 - Earth getting a Major Solar Storm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread478278/pg1Another New Crop Circle Predicts July 7th 2009 - Earth getting a Major Solar Storm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread478278/pg1Another New Crop Circle Predicts July 7th 2009 - Earth getting a Major Solar Storm</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619149</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247046660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If that correlation were indeed true, then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures, and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words, that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows."</p><p>If that correlation were indeed true (and it is being tested by CERN as we speak), then it is NOT true to say that it would have been 'masking Global Warming'. The correlation would have been the main CAUSE of global warming, and CO2 would have been comparatively insignificant.</p><p>Why is that that true believers in AGW caused by CO2 always take it as proven that CO2 is the 'cause of all our ills' when in reality that has never been proven, and is now looking increasingly unlikely?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If that correlation were indeed true , then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures , and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words , that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows .
" If that correlation were indeed true ( and it is being tested by CERN as we speak ) , then it is NOT true to say that it would have been 'masking Global Warming' .
The correlation would have been the main CAUSE of global warming , and CO2 would have been comparatively insignificant.Why is that that true believers in AGW caused by CO2 always take it as proven that CO2 is the 'cause of all our ills ' when in reality that has never been proven , and is now looking increasingly unlikely ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If that correlation were indeed true, then the recent solar minimum would have been correlated with low temperatures, and hence would have been masking some of the effect of global warming-- in other words, that greenhouse-effect warming is actually occurring to a greater extent than the data shows.
"If that correlation were indeed true (and it is being tested by CERN as we speak), then it is NOT true to say that it would have been 'masking Global Warming'.
The correlation would have been the main CAUSE of global warming, and CO2 would have been comparatively insignificant.Why is that that true believers in AGW caused by CO2 always take it as proven that CO2 is the 'cause of all our ills' when in reality that has never been proven, and is now looking increasingly unlikely?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612975</id>
	<title>Global Warming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247000340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The increase in temperature of planet Earth caused by Global Warming has changed the ambient temperature in our Solar System ever so slightly. This has caused irreparable damage the the Sun's delicate jet stream. The Cap and Trade bill will be too late to prevent Supernova.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The increase in temperature of planet Earth caused by Global Warming has changed the ambient temperature in our Solar System ever so slightly .
This has caused irreparable damage the the Sun 's delicate jet stream .
The Cap and Trade bill will be too late to prevent Supernova .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The increase in temperature of planet Earth caused by Global Warming has changed the ambient temperature in our Solar System ever so slightly.
This has caused irreparable damage the the Sun's delicate jet stream.
The Cap and Trade bill will be too late to prevent Supernova.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618543</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>haifastudent</author>
	<datestamp>1246995600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years."</p></div><p>ACHTUNG! Do not look at sunspots with remaining eye!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is the best sunspot I 've seen in two years. " ACHTUNG !
Do not look at sunspots with remaining eye !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years."ACHTUNG!
Do not look at sunspots with remaining eye!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613851</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1246960680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That they are discrete, perhaps, is a misconception. You won't hear me claiming they're discrete.</p><p>A continuous field contains infinitely many paths from high to low potential, all of which are "lines". A representative few are used to approximate the field when we're drawing it, which leads to the misunderstanding about them being discrete.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That they are discrete , perhaps , is a misconception .
You wo n't hear me claiming they 're discrete.A continuous field contains infinitely many paths from high to low potential , all of which are " lines " .
A representative few are used to approximate the field when we 're drawing it , which leads to the misunderstanding about them being discrete .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That they are discrete, perhaps, is a misconception.
You won't hear me claiming they're discrete.A continuous field contains infinitely many paths from high to low potential, all of which are "lines".
A representative few are used to approximate the field when we're drawing it, which leads to the misunderstanding about them being discrete.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613577</id>
	<title>Re:Is it just me ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246959540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just you.  Here in central Texas we've been having record high temperatures regularly for over a month now (mostly 103-105).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just you .
Here in central Texas we 've been having record high temperatures regularly for over a month now ( mostly 103-105 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just you.
Here in central Texas we've been having record high temperatures regularly for over a month now (mostly 103-105).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613069</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>DarkHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1246957560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boj9ccV9htk" title="youtube.com">No it doesn't</a> [youtube.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>No it does n't [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it doesn't [youtube.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28622665</id>
	<title>Re:wow.</title>
	<author>Altreus</author>
	<datestamp>1247069400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish.</p></div><p>This would make it the best sunspot I'd ever seen too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish.This would make it the best sunspot I 'd ever seen too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all you know he could be one of those bad-ass astronomers they make movies about and he could have been sitting at the 'scope looking at the spot while getting a blow job from a hot chick like in Swordfish.This would make it the best sunspot I'd ever seen too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1246959120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're no more real than latitude lines.  The magnetic field is continuous, it doesn't possess discrete lines.  Objects IN the field can form a line, but that is more of a spontaneous symmetry breaking effect... I.E., iron filings could form a hundred distinguishable lines, or a thousand.  The filings experiment is neat, but I think it gave millions of schoolkids the idea that there is an actual number of preferred lines running from one end of the magnet to the other.<br> <br>

A cone doesn't have a finite number of preferred paths down from the top.  But if you pour water on the top, the water will run downhill and form a number of discrete streams.  That does mean that there are 'lines of gravity'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're no more real than latitude lines .
The magnetic field is continuous , it does n't possess discrete lines .
Objects IN the field can form a line , but that is more of a spontaneous symmetry breaking effect.. .
I.E. , iron filings could form a hundred distinguishable lines , or a thousand .
The filings experiment is neat , but I think it gave millions of schoolkids the idea that there is an actual number of preferred lines running from one end of the magnet to the other .
A cone does n't have a finite number of preferred paths down from the top .
But if you pour water on the top , the water will run downhill and form a number of discrete streams .
That does mean that there are 'lines of gravity' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're no more real than latitude lines.
The magnetic field is continuous, it doesn't possess discrete lines.
Objects IN the field can form a line, but that is more of a spontaneous symmetry breaking effect...
I.E., iron filings could form a hundred distinguishable lines, or a thousand.
The filings experiment is neat, but I think it gave millions of schoolkids the idea that there is an actual number of preferred lines running from one end of the magnet to the other.
A cone doesn't have a finite number of preferred paths down from the top.
But if you pour water on the top, the water will run downhill and form a number of discrete streams.
That does mean that there are 'lines of gravity'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623</id>
	<title>wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246998780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years."</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... MAN does this guy need to get laid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is the best sunspot I 've seen in two years .
" ... MAN does this guy need to get laid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is the best sunspot I've seen in two years.
" ... MAN does this guy need to get laid.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614621</id>
	<title>Re:"The magnetic field lines are clearly visible.</title>
	<author>IamX</author>
	<datestamp>1246963740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you two are mistaking "conceptual" for "imaginary".
The mathematical "real line" is itself a conceptual construct.

Humans do not have the cognitive machinery to sense a  point/line/circle. Without defining what is meant by real arguing over what is not real ( imaginary ) is meaningless.

 There are no lines there that one can be seen/sensed/ measured on it's own, instead there is how the iron fillings/plasma align that makes our primate brain see lines. This is just the Machs principle that it is meaningless to talk about the distance from earth to the moon without moon being there.

Please someone reply with an example of a "real line",  e.g. is the line I draw on the paper a real line? or is it just the difference on reflection from paper that makes my brain to interpret it as "a line"?

What you are arguing over is not physics but meaning. If you can gather some magnetic field lines and put them in vase, water them and sell them for a buck then they are more real. There is no "real flower", just instances of the concept of flower, it is your mind that simplifies your view so you can hold onto a "real flower".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you two are mistaking " conceptual " for " imaginary " .
The mathematical " real line " is itself a conceptual construct .
Humans do not have the cognitive machinery to sense a point/line/circle .
Without defining what is meant by real arguing over what is not real ( imaginary ) is meaningless .
There are no lines there that one can be seen/sensed/ measured on it 's own , instead there is how the iron fillings/plasma align that makes our primate brain see lines .
This is just the Machs principle that it is meaningless to talk about the distance from earth to the moon without moon being there .
Please someone reply with an example of a " real line " , e.g .
is the line I draw on the paper a real line ?
or is it just the difference on reflection from paper that makes my brain to interpret it as " a line " ?
What you are arguing over is not physics but meaning .
If you can gather some magnetic field lines and put them in vase , water them and sell them for a buck then they are more real .
There is no " real flower " , just instances of the concept of flower , it is your mind that simplifies your view so you can hold onto a " real flower " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you two are mistaking "conceptual" for "imaginary".
The mathematical "real line" is itself a conceptual construct.
Humans do not have the cognitive machinery to sense a  point/line/circle.
Without defining what is meant by real arguing over what is not real ( imaginary ) is meaningless.
There are no lines there that one can be seen/sensed/ measured on it's own, instead there is how the iron fillings/plasma align that makes our primate brain see lines.
This is just the Machs principle that it is meaningless to talk about the distance from earth to the moon without moon being there.
Please someone reply with an example of a "real line",  e.g.
is the line I draw on the paper a real line?
or is it just the difference on reflection from paper that makes my brain to interpret it as "a line"?
What you are arguing over is not physics but meaning.
If you can gather some magnetic field lines and put them in vase, water them and sell them for a buck then they are more real.
There is no "real flower", just instances of the concept of flower, it is your mind that simplifies your view so you can hold onto a "real flower".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618613</id>
	<title>Re:Man saved Earth?</title>
	<author>Buchenskjoll</author>
	<datestamp>1246996620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen an estimate of world population at around 500 million people in 1650. So hundreds of millions dying seems quite a lot...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen an estimate of world population at around 500 million people in 1650 .
So hundreds of millions dying seems quite a lot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen an estimate of world population at around 500 million people in 1650.
So hundreds of millions dying seems quite a lot...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614397</id>
	<title>Re:Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>TigerTime</author>
	<datestamp>1246962720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the theory was that the temperature of Earth increases as the number of sunspots on the Sun increases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the theory was that the temperature of Earth increases as the number of sunspots on the Sun increases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the theory was that the temperature of Earth increases as the number of sunspots on the Sun increases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895</id>
	<title>Well, now we'll know.</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1246999920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up. (There is a <b>very</b> strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.)
<br> <br>
Maybe now we'll find out who's right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw the tag but have n't seen this explicitly mentioned yet : one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up .
( There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth .
) Maybe now we 'll find out who 's right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw the tag but haven't seen this explicitly mentioned yet: one theory is that lack of sunspots causes Earth to warm up.
(There is a very strong negative correlation between sunspot activity and temperature on Earth.
)
 
Maybe now we'll find out who's right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28650647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28754357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28622665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618675
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613577
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28621265
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28617869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_07_1858223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612849
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613577
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614117
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28650647
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618675
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613327
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613477
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614171
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613851
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618233
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614621
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616005
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624157
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613713
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28622665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613117
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613125
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613123
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613203
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618613
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28624231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_07_1858223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28612895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28621265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613471
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613069
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28754357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613007
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28617869
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28615967
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614553
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28618511
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28616419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28614175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28613971
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_07_1858223.28619149
</commentlist>
</conversation>
