Neil’s second decade :- Worth noting

I left the following comment at  http://neil2decade.wordpress.com/2010/08/01/worth-noting

As usual I await his answer with interest.

“Interesting,

As a believer in truth and a critic of media coverage of any event or issue, I would say that in my country, balanced reporting on AGW is non existent, 99.99% goes the AGW is beyond discussion way, and very occasionally you may see something printed to the tone of “there are still people who do not believe in AGW in spite of the mountain of evidence against them”

Quite different from your statistics.

By the way did you cout the scientists at  http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/UN_open_letter.pdf
or
http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=54

or

http://www.petitionproject.org/

in your statistics?

Fortunately it does not take a PhD to figure out that there is something fishy about AGW. My site at http://rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com/ enables any lay person to start asking for real facts and information.

I have an open mind but I have not seen any definitive proof of AGW either, and most certainly not any where enough certainty to justify the ruining of our economies and way of life over it.

Cheers

Roger”

Neil said 4 hours ago:

Roger the Kiwi Troll is back. His science is no more convincing than it was last time. He still quotes the Oregon Petition for Christ’s sake. He is a fuckwit. Same old, same old.

As I recently said, I am tired of suffering fools gladly.

 I regret that Neil can only resort to name calling. Note that he avoids even adressing my question.

Neil at first spammed my comment on his site but he did leave me the following comment on the main page of this site.

Reproduced below with my reply.

 

Neil Says:
August 1, 2010 at 6:22 am | Reply   edit

Go and change the minds of the present and past presidents of the Royal Society, Stephen Hawking, and just about every scientist of note in the world and I will be impressed. Or are they all part of some UN/communist plot to bring down civilisation as we know it?

  • rogerthesurf Says:
    August 1, 2010 at 10:29 am | Reply   editNeil,There may be plenty of hypothesis around, and people who swear by them but it only takes one disproving factor to question anyone’s hypothesis.Whether they are part of a plot or not is irrelevant.

    I see you spammed my comment but it is faithfully recorded under your url and title right here on this site.

    As for the Royal Society, lets keep an eye on them shall we?
    http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/05/royal-society-fellows-question-b.html
    http://www.climatechangefraud.com/climate-reports/7040-rebel-scientists-force-royal-society-to-accept-climate-change-scepticism

    Cheers

    Roger

  • Neil Says:
    August 1, 2010 at 10:34 am | Reply   editYour comment was spammed by Akismet but I restored it. Don’t bother coming back though, as I saw everything you have to contribute in March.
  • Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s


    %d bloggers like this: