Comments on: Missing Climate Headlines from May 2009

By: coetsee

coetsee — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:40:39 +0000

After last post on marketing without search engines, I decided to follow up with a strategy you can use to get quality free traffic. One of the easiest ways to get visitors to your web site is to spend money. Nothing is more effortless then paying for traffic. But if you can’t afford it or don’t want to pay, there’s an equally simple but free way to get traffic: ad swaps.

onlineuniversalwork

Report this

0 0

By: Vincent

Vincent — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:13:32 +0000

Question
Open a cold can of coca cola and watch it goes flat as it approaches room temperature. Why?

Report this

0 0

By: tom

tom — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:01:16 +0000

Though I work as a contractor in support of NASA, I make no claims of deep science background. But armed with an economics degree and 40 years in the technical services business supporting US governemtn programs in DoD, Commerce and NASA, I confess that on global warming/climate change, my opinion is greatly influenced by the opinions and positions I read in numerous print and online forms. As such, I must say that in the past year or so of my interest in this topic, by far the most convincing arguments I’ve been exposed to are from the skeptic’s side of the aisle. What I feel should be noted by the taxpaying public is the disturing interest shown in global warming/ climate change by our nation’s politicians. Now this class of society (to me) have nearly neglibile intellectual contribution to make to our society. Almost across-the-board, the only thing our Congress?Senate class posses is law degrees. What does that really offer to America in problem solving, policy development or “vision”. I look at a man like Henry Waxman, researchc his biography and that of his cohort Congressman Markey, and I see nothing whatsoever in either of theirt backgrounds that suits them to being the achitects of America’s energy policy. Waxman holds a plitical science degree and a law degree. What does that equip him to do in or about energy?

The fact that policiticans, few with even an iota of hands-on knowledge of science, in any form, are glomming onto the global climate change bandwagon, shoud be a telltale warning to any taxpayer who will be left footing the bill for this excursion in society shaping and reengineering. Taxpayers shout certainly be able to remember way back to last Septemember and recall being told (oh so loudly) that the TARP Bill just HAD to ba acted upon immediately, with NO delay, and shoulld recall too being told how all that TARP money was going to be used to buy up all of those “toxic assets” that brought down the subprime market. The fact that after swift passage of that TARP Bill, the toxic assests were ignored shold not be lost on the taxpayers – the ones now being told that we cannot delay a minite further to undermine the very fabric of basic, 21st century American society and paint our houses white, drive unsafe mini-mobiles on our highways, and fill our homes with overpriced, mercury-filled, Chinese made compact lightbulbs that will then flood our landfills…

That politicians are so actively promoting global climate change should tell the average American all they need to know to make up their mind on this controversial topic.

When deciding to take a try at skydiving, has anyone ever been told that the right way to enter the sport is to learn how to repack one’s parachute quickly?

Report this

0 0

By: Bob Campbell

Bob Campbell — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:28:08 +0000

Oh dear. Is my face red.
Thanks Anne-Kit Litler and Jo.
Naturally I realised that the ‘missing headlines’ were made up.
Damn pity about the little quote though. Oh what I could have done with it.
I’ll get over this disappointment in a couple of days.

Not very cheery at the moment
Bob

Report this

0 0

By: ed gallagher/fasteddy

ed gallagher/fasteddy — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:34:27 +0000

Well, it’s official. Il Duce Obama has declared the debate is over. Wonder if the climate will pay attention to him and start adhering to the computer climate models so we can all march lockstep to doomsday while we starve to death in the dark & cold because of carbon taxes and administrative fiats.

Report this

0 0

By: Joanne Nova

Joanne Nova — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:54:25 +0000

Ahem, Bob, sorry – Anne-Kit is right, that’s my satirical poke at them. No one has said that – at least not that I know of. But they behave as though that ought to happen. “The Models are Right”… lets adjust that data again.

I write Satire and Parody in the tags at the bottom of the story if I have done anything in that style. (See the grey bar at the bottom). Perhaps I should make it more obvious?

cheers
JoNova

Report this

0 0

By: Anne-Kit Littler

Anne-Kit Littler — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:43:50 +0000

Ummm, Bob … these “Missing Headlines” are a spoof. It’s satire. They’re not actually headlines, we only wish they were! Jo made them up …

Report this

0 0

By: Bob Campbell

Bob Campbell — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:26:07 +0000

Jo in your intro into what is in the SPPI report is -

A spokesman for the IPCC said ‘the planet’s response is surprising, given that we all have Nobel Prizes’.

I’d love to know where this comes from as googling it only links back to here.

Bob Campbell

Report this

0 0

By: ed gallagher/fasteddy

ed gallagher/fasteddy — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:31:31 +0000

It’s obvious the AGW cult is getting scared when they start to put out drivel like this……..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ

Report this

0 0

By: Brian G Valentine

Brian G Valentine — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 03:43:37 +0000

The US gov’t under Bush paid the National Academy of Sciences in 2001 to determine if “the IPCC story of AGW was making sense.”

NAS provided report, didn’t answer question.

Two years later, AGW became NAS policy when int’l agreement between National Academies was formed.

Bush never believed AGW until about 2006. Somebody on his staff (I think a younger person) kind of bent his ear. I’m not sure who that was that tilted him.

VP Cheney never believed a word about it – but he kep kind of quiet. The left hated Cheney even more than Bush.

Bush was not the “britest” light in the light bulb package.

Anyhow, I am paid by the US Government. I am not paid to be a sceptic and write papers – but that is a lot of what I do – the US Government knows full well what my professional focus is, and can neither alter nor redirect my efforts.

The US Government lives with my profession, because it lives with people like Hansen. Just as they cannot direct him, the US Government cannot direct my efforts, either

Qualifier: Government prefers that claims I make become reviewed externally by peer review, which I do

Report this

0 0