Was there a link I missed?
Scroll down. Goober posted it.The link in the OP referring to the news report about the report and one that goober posted referring to the report itself, so far.
Bump
And he posted it twice more. rofl
Scroll down. Goober posted it.
lmao I know, I'm still splittin a gut here.Twice- So I guess Gerri is an assumin type of person. Never read the report but tells you that you are assuming. Not another one of those. My god.
As I mentioned twice before, in order to get the report, you have to join the group that published it, and possibly put up with their server issues and download the report. Then the goofy thing won't let you copy and paste. Which is why I have been quoting it rather than cutting and pasting.That's fine but your posts provide no reports of scientific or statistical anaylasis of energy usage pertaining to the subject.
Perhaps you can c&p the results from what you have read in the study.
No?
That's fine but your posts provide no reports of scientific or statistical anaylasis of energy usage pertaining to the subject.
No?
I never said the report was accurate or not.
Seems others did that already, so where is your scrutiny of that old boy?
Does it take into account distance or not.
Yeah. I did answer your question. . Just didn't use a two-letter, single-syllable reply.
Here it is for ya, Dopey. NO. I guess judging by your responses so far I better include the definition just in case you were wondering about that complicated answer, too:
from Merriam-Webster
1no
adv \ˈnō\
1
a chiefly Scottish : notb —used as a function word to express the negative of an alternative choice or possibility <shall we go out to dinner or no>
............. the report itself.Quoting?
He's short stop or 3rd base, Can't remember which.Where?
Right and you lie down right along side with what want to believe.
Is the report accurate?
I see little evidence to suggest either way but the initial response seems to be against.
Only partially. It's problem seems to be missing some parameters, like size of country, climate of country, and also includes parameters that have only a partial comprehension of variables. In other words, it is an extremely incomplete report.Is the report accurate?
Read what, the same thing you did?
Got to guys, take care of yourselves and have a good life.
Avro out.
....... to lunch ...... in left field ....... lost in space ......Avro out.
Guys, don't get a hernia over this report. Just state your criticisms and check to see if they are acknowledged.
Too late. Got one from busting a gut over Avro's antics. lolGuys, don't get a hernia over this report.
Did I say that? China has a very long way to go but it is moving in the right direction.You think China is energy-efficient? Ever been there?
Did I say that? China has a very long way to go but it is moving in the right direction.
The GDP does not determine the score. That is only one of the factors. Wherever I read it, it included the factors I mentioned.Funny though, right in the executive summary, the report (not news reports on the report) says "performance metrics include the amount of energy consumed by a country relative tot its GDP". Kind of says that the GDP of a country largely determines its score.
I didn't read anything in it about the results being adjusted for area or climate. And it did say that it omitted most countries in the EU.
Like I said, the report laid out the variables it included. The GDP was one of them. It's missing quite a few others.And they do have an effect on the scores.The GDP does not determine the score. That is only one of the factors. Wherever I read it, it included the factors I mentioned.
Rather ignorant poster. Is that how you will be for your short time here.
Read what, the same thing you did?
Got to guys, take care of yourselves and have a good life.
Avro out.