And in case you missed it, that is an anthropogenic impact.I think deforestation plays a role in the climate ! More cities are build and more trees are cut down which causes cities act like a urban heat island.
And in case you missed it, that is an anthropogenic impact.I think deforestation plays a role in the climate ! More cities are build and more trees are cut down which causes cities act like a urban heat island.
So instead of simply pretending scientists don't know what they are doing, why don't you clearly state your views?...,...I have NEVER stated there was not Global warming,...
You're right; pressure to follow scientific method.2nd,...You confirm once again that you can't comprehend that peer reviews can be a form of peer pressure,...
FAST doesn't have a clue what peer review means. He had literally no idea. But that doesn't stop him from from posting.Can you explain that?
Peer review is a critiquing of scientific work, which can either be positive or negative. It must be objective.
Scholarly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal or as a book.
I'll give this a shot GPIDEAL,...I actually think you are mature enough to reply without the 1st word in your post being "you",...followed by a bunch of childish insults.Can you explain that?
Peer review is a critiquing of scientific work, which can either be positive or negative. It must be objective.
Scholarly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal or as a book.
Good point!And in case you missed it, that is an anthropogenic impact.
A peer reviewed journal is sort of like a scientific proof-reading. If someone's work doesn't stand up to scrutiny, he either goes back to the drawing board, or licks his wounds and carries on if he's confidant. He might not have majority support, but it might be enough to be published. Competing theories do exist. If his work is bullshit or very very bad, he will fail or will learn a valuable lesson.I'll give this a shot GPIDEAL,...I actually think you are mature enough to reply without the 1st word in your post being "you",...followed by a bunch of childish insults.
Some points.
-My take on this subject of peer review is,...-To have a magazine with individual anonymous reviewers decide what is acceptable,...without any unbiased oversight,...I have a problem.
-There has been a lot of inertial for decades now regarding man being the sole cause,...CO2,... of global warming/climate change.
-Thousands of "experts" incomes depend solely on man being responsible,...
-The UN is pushing this rationale for its own agenda,...which has NOTHING to do with the climate,...but only adds to the pressure to conform.
-To have a complete reversal,... say in the form of the actual cause being a sun cycle for example,... would be a disaster for 10's of thousands who depend on the "current" status.
-I know,...I'm saying I don't trust the current snow ball rolling down hill,...is a bit much to take,...hey,...that's MY opinion. ( it might actually melt 1st,...right
-Nobody here is in any position to actually debate the globes climate,...nobody.
-Sorry for rambling,...I'm short on time right now.
Again, you don't have a fucking CLUE what peer review is. You just don't. You think you do, so you post blithering nonsense like this, but you don't. You'rethe worst sorry sort of ignoramus: you blather away on subjects you know absolutely jack shit about.-My take on this subject of peer review is,...-To have a magazine with individual anonymous reviewers decide what is acceptable,...without any unbiased oversight,...I have a problem.
Again, you don't have a fucking CLUE what peer review is. You just don't. You think you do, so you post blithering nonsense like this, but you don't. You'rethe worst sorry sort of ignoramus: you blather away on subjects you know absolutely jack shit about.Blah,...blah,...blah,... :blah:
Careful there Fast!Again, you don't have a fucking CLUE what peer review is. You just don't. You think you do, so you post blithering nonsense like this, but you don't. You'rethe worst sorry sort of ignoramus: you blather away on subjects you know absolutely jack shit about.
Troll. Cutting and pasting my post is childish. You don't understand peer review at all and now multiple people have called you on it.Again, you don't have a fucking CLUE what peer review is. You just don't. You think you do, so you post blithering nonsense like this, but you don't. You'rethe worst sorry sort of ignoramus: you blather away on subjects you know absolutely jack shit about.
Words cannot describe how apoplectic you got when you were revealed to be a fraud. Anyone with actual business experience would not have claimed the BoC accumulating USD would result in borrowing USD.Careful there Fast!
When cornered and unable to provide a logical counter argument Fuji will, revert to reporting you to the mods
Words can not properly describe the contempt and lack of respect I have for Fuji
Nice try, liar. You have been running ever since that discussion about immunizing the Canadian dollar from oil price volatility by having BoC collect USD and pay CAD at a fixed rate. That can lead to BoC borrowing in CAD but it will never leaf to BoC borrowing in USD.Whatever Fuji has replied with (I have him on ignore) is sure to be factually incorrect and of zero value
He lacks the intelligence to make logical arguments and when the heat gets turned up he tattle tales to the mods. Behaviour which is most often associated with teens under the age of 14.
Troll. Your post is childish. You don't understand peer review at all and now multiple people have called you on it.Blah,...blah,...blah,...:blah: .
First I have to compliment you on your post,...being a definite cut above the 12 year olds troll post #187,...that was completely expected,...and apologies to 12 year olds.A peer reviewed journal is sort of like a scientific proof-reading. If someone's work doesn't stand up to scrutiny, he either goes back to the drawing board, or licks his wounds and carries on if he's confidant. He might not have majority support, but it might be enough to be published. Competing theories do exist. If his work is bullshit or very very bad, he will fail or will learn a valuable lesson.
P.S. It's a good thing to have one's work vetted. It may actually garner more support, especially if it's based on a novel idea.