Comments on: How many tax dollars have you paid towards climate PR or research?

By: Bush bunny

Bush bunny — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 07:48:08 +0000

SPAM ALERT: I don’t know about you all, but I am getting emails not only from the above, but also checking the header is from nova@cp.owire.net. Often advertising stuff but
under the return path to them. I haven’t had a fair dinkum email from Jo’s site for ages.

They offer the option of cancelling my subscription to this site. Greenies at work eh.

[Ignore the spam, we are having more than usual but we're removing them as fast as we can.]ED

Report this

0 0

By: Roy Hogue

Roy Hogue — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:01:22 +0000

Eddy @54,

Sorry for not being able to look in for a few days.

I presume you mean, being told “…your pedigree…” It’s a metaphor for being told off in very personal terms. My fault. I expected that it would be more widely understood.

Report this

0 0

By: Bush bunny

Bush bunny — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:10:48 +0000

I rang my cousin in Eire last night. And she was telling me the UN
job her naval officer son (The Irish Navy) had been put on hold. Seems he went to antarctica some years ago, and actually saw ice break
off (not unusual. Its also got a active volcano ‘Big Ben’) and Cobh had flooding that hadn’t happen before. The seas are rising she told me. It’s because of all the rain we have had? I didn’t argue. Well if that’s the case the UN job is no longer happening so I wonder why?

Report this

0 0

By: Graeme Bird

Graeme Bird — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:06:47 +0000

KIDS!!!!

“You are like the cranky old man that has kids throw rocks at his window just to watch him come and shout at them from the veranda in his dressing gown, waving his clenched fist in the air.”

Don’t the internet kids just make you laugh? Not ever suspecting the great valence of the protection they get from anonymity?

Matt aint so bad. Generally speaking he was a lot less abusive and insulting of honest scientists then most of the people I encountered at Jennifers place.

Report this

1 2

By: Graeme Bird

Graeme Bird — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 02:14:07 +0000

Ten years is fine Matt. You do what you people do until then. Who am I to judge? If thats the best person you can be its up to me to use zen thought control to block the visuals out of my mind. But you go on with my blessing, be careful, and don’t take undue risks. I’m trying to insist to you that I don’t require the evidence from you for another ten years. I want you to take this seriously and get off my case. Ten years is good enough. Pass a message on if you need twenty. Take care.

Report this

0 1

By: MattB

MattB — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:54:20 +0000

The last line was a polite way of saying “Graeme (SNIP) I see (SNIP) value in holding a discussion with you other than the humour value involved.” You are like the cranky old man that has kids throw rocks at his window just to watch him come and shout at them from the veranda in his dressing gown, waving his clenched fist in the air.

(SEVERELY Edited to keep the reasonable tone here at JN)

Report this

1 0

By: Graeme Bird

Graeme Bird — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:18:29 +0000

I don’t know what to make about that last line? Are you trying to gross me out by showering me with your gayness-vibes? I was expecting you would pull that so with malice-afforethought I suggested that you don’t have to get back to me with evidence for ten years.

Clearly all my efforts were for nought and you still managed to slime me with these horrid, shall we say “ambivalent” vibes.

I’m going to have to take a shower with the breadknife and try and get all this slime off of me. There is nothing you people won’t try on to avoid the simple task of specifying the hypothesis, marshalling the evidence, and formulating the reasoning that you contend links the one with the other in a convincing way.

Ten years Matt.

Really.

There is no rush.

Report this

1 1

By: MattB

MattB — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:25:31 +0000

Graeme I was more referring to surviving impact. BUt to be frank it was more an “I’ll call you, honest.”

Report this

0 0

By: Graeme Bird

Graeme Bird — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:44:57 +0000

“I did alright…”

You did alright? Yes it is more than a year that has passed. You going to make me wait another year for evidence relating to the three specific hypotheses then?

I’ll put it on hold for five years and get back to you. You did just magnificent. No make that ten years. Thats how well you did. You were going to get back to me in a week or two. But you’ve now got ten years since you did so well. Being as one year has already passed thats 11 years total. This is how brilliantly well you did.

Report this

2 1

By: mick

mick — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:37:23 +0000

Tel: I was buying those things regularly for a while and they do NOT last 15,000 hours. I’ve had some that lasted only a few days.

Apart from the obvious fact that they’re mainly cheap, crappy, toxic Chinese junk & that’s not likely to change anytime soon in the future, Australian Govt officials & Chinese manufacturers sat down together in Shanghai to pollute Australian Standards. They worked out between them that the new standard would be measured at 1000 switch cycles per 6000 lamp hours. So they’re pretending that the average domestic globe only gets turned on & off on average every 6 hours burning to make the claims they do. I suppose you can legally get whatever numbers you want on the box when you’ve got big Govt behind you… you can read the seminar if you’re interested:

http://www.iesanz.org/media/docs/phase_out_seminar/dewha_presentation_lc_ies_seminars.ppt

It’s highly offensive as well as utter bs. And just to tie it into the funding & PR topic, how much ‘rollout’ propaganda like this is lurking beneath the surface?

PS And they’re all going in future – halogens, fluoros, floods, fancy rounds, pilot lamps – you can kiss your straight sticks goodbye in the next round they reckon.

Report this

2 1