Comments on: Pub questions http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/ Tackling tribal groupthink Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:09:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: North Sea Winter Operations - Page 2 - PPRuNe Forums http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-158165 North Sea Winter Operations - Page 2 - PPRuNe Forums Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:52:47 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-158165 [...] [...] [...] [...]

Report this

00

]]> By: TWAWKI » 2009 Climate Gongs and Awards http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-41838 TWAWKI » 2009 Climate Gongs and Awards Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:44:18 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-41838 [...] 2009 became the year when if its warming its climate, if its cooling then its weather. It was also the year that the Alarmists repeatedly stuttered the phrase even if its cooling its still warming. Oh and don’t forget the clanger – if its warming its because of man if its cooling its because of nature. In 2009 we saw the alarmists re-adjust the data to try and fit the failed AGW theory. All of a sudden La Ninas had an impact on the climate whereas in previous years ENSO was ruled out by them as insignificant. 2009 science fiction award to METOffice for constantly being unable to distinguish between juvenile model projections and actual climate reality – all the while predicting the warmest whatever on record as Britain froze. Again an example of tens of millions of taxpayers money being wasted on politicalised science and citizens lives being put at risk in the process. Nature got the Denatured gong for totally ignoring nature and New Sciennce got the Nudescience gong for being caught with its scientific pants down so many times it might as well have been naked. The 2009 science realism award went to Jo Nova for her ongoing realistic articles and journalism. [...] [...] 2009 became the year when if its warming its climate, if its cooling then its weather. It was also the year that the Alarmists repeatedly stuttered the phrase even if its cooling its still warming. Oh and don’t forget the clanger – if its warming its because of man if its cooling its because of nature. In 2009 we saw the alarmists re-adjust the data to try and fit the failed AGW theory. All of a sudden La Ninas had an impact on the climate whereas in previous years ENSO was ruled out by them as insignificant. 2009 science fiction award to METOffice for constantly being unable to distinguish between juvenile model projections and actual climate reality – all the while predicting the warmest whatever on record as Britain froze. Again an example of tens of millions of taxpayers money being wasted on politicalised science and citizens lives being put at risk in the process. Nature got the Denatured gong for totally ignoring nature and New Sciennce got the Nudescience gong for being caught with its scientific pants down so many times it might as well have been naked. The 2009 science realism award went to Jo Nova for her ongoing realistic articles and journalism. [...]

Report this

00

]]> By: Roy Hogue http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-23073 Roy Hogue Sat, 02 Jan 2010 18:38:20 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-23073 Oops! It was 2old4this who posted about the DOE. I got two good posts mixed up. Oops! It was 2old4this who posted about the DOE. I got two good posts mixed up.

Report this

00

]]> By: Roy Hogue http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-23072 Roy Hogue Sat, 02 Jan 2010 18:33:59 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-23072 <blockquote>“Reality Checks”</blockquote> Ed Gallagher, I love it! One problem may exist in that there may not be a better candidate to support. I don't know how to deal with this unless we can grow up our own candidates. Any ideas? Denny, The question about the DOE is, does it produce any energy? The glaring truth is not only that it doesn't but that it gets in the way of energy production.

“Reality Checks”

Ed Gallagher,

I love it! One problem may exist in that there may not be a better candidate to support. I don’t know how to deal with this unless we can grow up our own candidates. Any ideas?

Denny,

The question about the DOE is, does it produce any energy? The glaring truth is not only that it doesn’t but that it gets in the way of energy production.

Report this

10

]]> By: ed gallagher http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-23050 ed gallagher Sat, 02 Jan 2010 14:31:22 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-23050 Thanks P. Gosselin, the home site link RPS3.com is another great weapon in the arsenal against the no growth eco-nazis of the AGW KoolAid Club Thanks P. Gosselin, the home site link RPS3.com is another great weapon in the arsenal against the no growth eco-nazis of the AGW KoolAid Club

Report this

10

]]> By: P Gosselin http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-23036 P Gosselin Sat, 02 Jan 2010 12:00:51 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-23036 Jeff Id presents Rutan. Worth the watch. http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/burt-rutan-on-global-warming/ Jeff Id presents Rutan.
Worth the watch.
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/burt-rutan-on-global-warming/

Report this

10

]]> By: Denny http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-22965 Denny Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:04:32 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-22965 2old4this: Post 82, <blockquote>The questions and answers you propose are apples and oranges. Oil is finite but is still quite plentiful if you are willing to pay the price.</blockquote> 2old, hey, I like that title..I too feel like that at times...Yes, I see what you are getting at! I was thinking along those lines but still posted the article because I wanted to show the "Apple" and "Oranges"! Good post though and well taken...Thanks for the input. And yes, you have to love "Carter" :( for what he did! 2old4this: Post 82,

The questions and answers you propose are apples and oranges. Oil is finite but is still quite plentiful if you are willing to pay the price.

2old, hey, I like that title..I too feel like that at times…Yes, I see what you are getting at! I was thinking along those lines but still posted the article because I wanted to show the “Apple” and “Oranges”! Good post though and well taken…Thanks for the input. And yes, you have to love “Carter” :( for what he did!

Report this

30

]]> By: 2old4this http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-22951 2old4this Sat, 02 Jan 2010 00:56:41 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-22951 Denny @ 79 and Henry @ 5 The questions and answers you propose are apples and oranges. Oil is finite but is still quite plentiful if you are willing to pay the price. Nigeria requires $75 a bbl to break even. The up front costs for the new Tiber discovery are tremendous. One day alternative energy will undercut the cost of petroleum and there will still be oil in the ground. On the other hand - read "The Bottomless Well." I repeat, oil is finite but as Huber and Mills prove there is no end of energy. Now if we could just get the guvmint out of the energy business ..... You know the Department of Energy, right? Created during the Carter Administration on August 4th 1977 to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 32 years later their budget is over $23 billion a year, they have over 16,000 employees and just look how much good they have done. Denny @ 79 and Henry @ 5

The questions and answers you propose are apples and oranges. Oil is finite but is still quite plentiful if you are willing to pay the price. Nigeria requires $75 a bbl to break even. The up front costs for the new Tiber discovery are tremendous. One day alternative energy will undercut the cost of petroleum and there will still be oil in the ground.
On the other hand – read “The Bottomless Well.” I repeat, oil is finite but as Huber and Mills prove there is no end of energy.
Now if we could just get the guvmint out of the energy business ….. You know the Department of Energy, right? Created during the Carter Administration on August 4th 1977 to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 32 years later their budget is over $23 billion a year, they have over 16,000 employees and just look how much good they have done.

Report this

20

]]> By: Denny http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-22938 Denny Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:54:59 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-22938 P Gosselin: Post 36, <blockquote>Still, 2500 scientists contributed to the IPCC 4AR. Surely a few eccentric sideshow scientists cannot be right and thousands are wrong. Wouldn’t you tend to go along with the 2500? You can aleways find a few who will dispute anything. That’s the argument that gives me the most trouble. Can you help out? Thanks.</blockquote> Mr. Gosselin, try checking out this article and see if this is what you're looking for...Hope it helps! http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1469.post P Gosselin: Post 36,

Still, 2500 scientists contributed to the IPCC 4AR.
Surely a few eccentric sideshow scientists cannot be right and thousands are wrong.
Wouldn’t you tend to go along with the 2500?
You can aleways find a few who will dispute anything.

That’s the argument that gives me the most trouble. Can you help out?
Thanks.

Mr. Gosselin, try checking out this article and see if this is what you’re looking for…Hope it helps!

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1469.post

Report this

30

]]> By: Denny http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/#comment-22936 Denny Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:42:31 +0000 http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2899#comment-22936 astonerii: Post 25, <blockquote>“But around 1700, there was a 2.2°C rise in just 36 years.” Unless there is a geological reason for that warming, such as a mountain, or a new source of water, it is pretty much certain that a 36 year trend would have had to have been global in nature. Energy has a way of being redistributed.</blockquote> I thought this site might be of some interest in relation to this time frame involving volcano's. http://www.poetpatriot.com/timeline/tmlndisvolcanos.htm This "may" help explain why.. astonerii: Post 25,

“But around 1700, there was a 2.2°C rise in just 36 years.”
Unless there is a geological reason for that warming, such as a mountain, or a new source of water, it is pretty much certain that a 36 year trend would have had to have been global in nature. Energy has a way of being redistributed.

I thought this site might be of some interest in relation to this time frame involving volcano’s.

http://www.poetpatriot.com/timeline/tmlndisvolcanos.htm

This “may” help explain why..

Report this

20

]]>