2/15/2010
Busting the Climate Change Myth #4: Stick a fork in it - it's done!
- Climategate: What Did Phil Jones Actually Admit? Was He Correct?
- BBC: Q&A: Professor Phil Jones
- Climategate: Phil Jones finally proves Al Gore right - the debate is over
- ZinOwl: Climategate: The Global Warmist’s Desperate Dance of Death
- I thought of killing myself, says climate scandal professor Phil Jones
ICECAP: International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project
ICECAP provides a venue for exchange of information regarding climate change:
ICECAP, International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, is the portal to all things climate for elected officials and staffers, journalists, scientists, educators and the public. It provides access to a new and growing global society of respected scientists and journalists that are not deniers that our climate is dynamic (the only constant in nature is change) and that man plays a role in climate change through urbanization, land use changes and the introduction of greenhouse gases and aerosols, but who also believe that natural cycles such as those in the sun and oceans are also important contributors to the global changes in our climate and weather. We worry the sole focus on greenhouse gases and the unwise reliance on imperfect climate models while ignoring real data may leave civilization unprepared for a sudden climate shift that history tells us will occur again, very possibly soon.
Through ICECAP you will have rapid access to our experts here in the United States and to experts and partner organizations worldwide, many of whom maintain popular web sites or insightful blogs or newsletters, write and present papers, have authored books and offer interviews to the media on climate issues. We spotlight new findings in peer-review papers and reports and rapidly respond to fallacies or exaggerations in papers, stories or programs and any misinformation efforts by the media, politicians and advocacy groups.
What does "peer-review" for scientific and technical publications actually mean?
Not as much as you might think!
Chicago Boyz: Scientific Peer-Review is a Lightweight Process
Oh, and by the way, I, 1389, formerly did some anonymous tech reviewing of IT- and computing-related manuscripts for a reputable publisher. Even though it paid very little, I did the best job I possibly could. My task was simply to make note of any deficiencies, errors, or omissions in the manuscript. Problems with the manuscript might include anything from unclear writing and garbled logic to poor methodology, obsolete information, and blatant factual errors.
That said, I was not tasked with fact-checking every assertion each author made. Nor was I expected to set up a test system to reproduce all the results from each author's computer program examples.
By and large, this peer review process is a good thing for publishers, in that it helps to weed out unsaleable manuscripts that are overloaded with trite observations, emotion-driven personal agendas, or incomprehensible drivel. That said, the peer review process is not capable of proving that the assertions in any manuscript are "right" or "wrong." Nor is the peer review process capable of withstanding an organized propaganda campaign bent on using scientific or technical expertise to bolster a partisan point of view.
The long and the short of it is that one cannot assume that the contents of a publication have been proved "correct" or represent a "scientific consensus" merely because the publication has been "peer-reviewed."
Busting the Climate Change Myth #3: "Big Journalism" Weighs In
Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism website weighs in on 'global warming.'
Just for starters, polar bears aren't vanishing, they're PROLIFERATING:
- Um — About Those Vanishing Polar Bears…
- Climate Change: A Canadian Newspaper Prints the Obituary of a Man-Made Hoax
- The Death of 'Global Warming?' We Still Need To Drive In The Stake
- Climategate, UK Edition: Following the Money, All €4 Trillion of It
- Al Gore, Call Your Agent: It Really May Be Time to Give Back That Oscar
2/13/2010
2/12/2010
Bad economic policy comes home to roost in Silicon Valley
Silicon Valley unemployment exceeds the national average, which shows that you can't build a healthy economy on outsourcing, h-1b visas, high taxes, nanny-state government, and training foreigners to do jobs that Americans are capable of, and should be, doing.
Unfortunately, Forbes magazine, which obviously has its own vested interests, gets it all wrong. This story calls for more of the same things (i.e., "globalization" and government intervention) that got us into this mess in the first place.
Forbes: Silicon Valley: So Long to Good Times
2/11/2010
2/08/2010
2/06/2010
Future Prospects of Russia and the U.S.
Is Russia still the "train wreck" portrayed in the mainstream media?
Gray Falcon: Whose Demise?
And will the U.S. go the way of the former Soviet Union?
Gray Falcon: Whither America?
Been Banned from Little Green Footballs?
Consider it a badge of honor!
First of all, you might want to check out The Coffee Shop Blog. Especially check the "Links for LGF Refugees" in the sidebar.
While I'm no fan of the New York Times, to put it mildly, you might find this article of interest: Right Wing Flame War
And if you have a blog or a home page anywhere, here are some images you can copy and display:
Why are Georgia and Georgia Both Named Georgia?
Georgia the country, and Georgia the US State: How did they get their names?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Blog Directory
