The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Comment History for Michael Rowan

The Forum > User Index > Michael Rowan > Comment History

» 29/12/2010 6:35:06 PM Mistaya: so many conned by so few? The Australian Academy of Sciences represents the most .....
» 24/12/2010 12:02:37 PM 1. Would people pay for their rubbish to be collected if they could just chuck it in the s.....
» 24/12/2010 11:29:14 AM Spindoc: 1. I deliberately chose to reference not the scientists themselves but the organi.....
» 24/12/2010 11:25:33 AM You are right about data, but this is not a fact about global warming but rather all scien.....
» 24/12/2010 11:21:49 AM Graham Y: Taking your paras one at a time: 1.how is this a fault of peer review itself? Wo.....
» 22/12/2010 8:18:20 PM Graham Y No process determines what is right. That is why science is never certain. Peer r.....
» 22/12/2010 8:09:06 PM viking13 Do I take it from this that no evidence would persuade you that the AGW hypothesi.....
» 22/12/2010 3:43:05 PM Jon J: See above re enquiries. On NZ’s temperature record, their National Institute of Wat.....
» 22/12/2010 3:40:26 PM Peter Hume: 1.Scientists of the calibre of the IPCC lead authors would be funded for resea.....
» 19/12/2010 2:49:02 PM How well do they do this? Chapter 8 of the IPCC 4th report deals with the evaluation of cl.....
» 19/12/2010 2:47:58 PM Ridd makes a fundamental error in his first line. There are not ‘two main lines of argumen.....

11 comments in total: 11 article comments, 0 general comments.

Return to Michael Rowan's user info page

 

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy