How about the words "Mike's nature trick"?
Posted on 01/18/2010 8:25:57 PM PST by Danae
“Rollback govt bit by bit”
That’s been the plan for 60 years. I don’t think it works. I think it’s like a smoker - give up all at once. Transformational change.
Ping
Do you have a doctorate in Climate Science? Ok then. Look for the words PEER REVIEWED. PEER REVIEWED.
It’s not a crime, when your president does it.
Economic growth Prevention Administration.
the administration to facilitate socialist consolidation and hoarding
LOL that’s a good one!!!
Thats true. Thats why it is checked against observaions. Why’s mathematic results match the observations, then ou aron to something!!!
Miskolczs match!!
Oh if people know about it and undersan this myth, it gets REALLY damn hard to keep pushing if forward, that’s why I am stickng my neck out to report on fhis stuff!!!
I've come the conclusion government has indeed, become a machine. It must keep moving, no matter the purpose or lack of direction.
It spews 'laws' by the THOUSANDS at every local, state, federal and international level.
While the People who's Rights it was created to preserve get trampled underfoot.... while it ignores what it, ITSELF creates.
-----
Thank you SO MUCH! It may not be an easy road, but it IS the right one.
Take care, Hon!
Earth's Greenhouse Effect is constant and does not rise with human CO2 emissions.Thanks ApplegateRanch.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
I will !!! You betcha!!
Do you even know what real peer review IS?? No you don’t
It is a full study REPEATING the the experiments used in the first Article, and then publishing the results.
Forgive me for being a complete bitch here, but I am in a lot of pain and I don’t feel like mincing my words.
So, have YOU attended a Lecture by Linus Pauling? No? I HAVE when he PEER REVIED the scientists work during the Cold Fusion Brouhaha. He tore it to shreds. I know Peer Review from INSIDE the community.
There is NOT ONE peer review of Miskolczi work that tears it to shreds. Every point made is either a gross miss-statement, meant solely to confuse the public, or simply incorrect, or only takes a part of the equation into consideration with out addressing the whole.
Kinda like saying “Oh well Miskolczi is saying 2+4 = 9”, using only PART of the equation he corrected. And of course that statement is not correct. BUT, you are leaving out part of the equation in a blatant attempt to confuse the public into believing it because it has the credibility of the government behind the “Science”,
Its bull&^%t all the way around. The equation is really 2 + 4 + 3 = 9, and when the whole equation and concept is given OF COURSE ITS CORRECT.
Don’t give me ANY BS about not having a background in science, BECAUSE I DO. I am no PhD and I don’t pretend to be, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t have the background to UNDERSTAND and translate it!
There is NO Peer Review of Miskolczi’s work that disproves it.
NONE.
lol
I’m sorry you’re in pain, I shouldn’t have wasted your time. I’m a scientist as well, and I full well understand what peer reviewed means. I haven’t worked with Linus Pauling, but I used to work for someone who has. I should have put the sarcasm mark, and I am sorry I didn’t. I got those talking points from Ed Begley Jr. who I saw on TV jabbing his finger at the interviewer and being the biggest a-hole I’ve ever seen.
Thanks for the butt chewing. I AM sorry, but I did enjoy your apologetic for Miskolczi and the scientific method.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.