Search results

Where are the peer reviews? You listed citation but without peer reviews you're dead in the water.

WWF is cited and aren't even accredited. Big whoop. How many on the AR 4 list are WWF hired flunkies?

They review "literature". Read their own words. Post your list! Who accredited the WWF and why is non-peer reviewed, biased material cited?

Post your list.

How would you feel if a group of young thugs punched you in the face, knocked you to the ground, stripped you naked and took off with your car keys, your watch, your money and your cell phone? Well, that is exactly what happened to one man in Baltimore recently and it was all caught on camera...

Barbie is the ultimate big-haired blonde, but there’s a grassroots movement afoot to make her go bald. Two women whose lives have been touched by cancer are urging toy giant Mattel to make a Barbie without a ‘do to help kids come to terms with hair loss. Their Facebook page for the...

First you start with iron ore. Add some copper..... LOTS of aluminum... Some molybdenum... Some lead and zinc Some lithium.... Some tin... Some magnesium... Oodles of Rare Earth Minerals ... We'll need some rubber.... Can't have rubber tires...

77% of the energy used by their hotel would be used for heating and hot water to wash up and shower. That would kill 300-400 blind polar bears in one fell swoop. PS did you know IPCC cites WWF several times in AR 4. When did WWF become a scientific peer reviewed body? Fourth Assessment...

It must be a real bitch trying to explain why it's dark and cold all winter in the polar regions?

The Royal Canadian Mint wants to get rid of pocket change — and it’s enlisting hacker-types for help. Less than a week after the government announced the penny’s impending death, the Mint quietly unveiled its digital currency called MintChip. Still in the research and development phase...

Why aren't global warming meetings held in Saskatoon in January? Doesn't look good on TV?

observed global warming.... There is a little saying at the heart of science that says "Correlation does not equal causation". When did that get tossed? Going by IPCC review style of correlation equalling causation, it is safe to declare that "if you quit high school you'll get pregnant"...

There has been some independant review but we'll just hear goofy **** like "they were paid off by big oil" even though they were cut a cheque from the IPCC. 4 out of 23 reviewers agree with this statement published in Capter 9 of AR 4 that "it is very highly likely that greenhouse gas forcing...

It's not a "peer review" system. It's just a review system.

Flossy. Is the review system for IPCC the same as the review process in other scientisfic agenices? Yes or no? What differs? Please explain in full or I'll whip out an "unconscionable" childish meme.

Yeah the "process" is pathetic. I'm glad you agree.

Is it a review system comparable to real science? Nope

I'll take double.

It's crap to ask who is peer reviewing the IPCC data and hypotheses? You should have no problems showing who but apparently you can't. Why can't you? There isn't any peer review on IPCC bull****??

To exploit resources in countries that need big fat "eco loans' to develope their resources. It's stupid that they swept it all under the rug and you now feel all warm and fuzzy? I'd say so.