He added a "u" because it said "Color" before.
Fucking merkans.
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 22:53,
archived)
actually
i haven't got a fucking clue, as if you hadn't already guessed
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 22:55,
archived)
ah! it's you! here's an attack at you from earlier (in the bestest fun, been watching the good the bad and the ugly since - awesome so far)
b3ta.com/board/8424537
if it 'stopped in 1998'
why are is the respected, peer-reviewed journal new scientist amongst others still publishing editorials and scientific articles on the subject?
here
here
here
see how easy that was to find a list of articles ruining the pseudo-science of rubbishing the reality of global warming? stop acting like a child and realise we are all resposible for our actions, and may have to clean up someone else's mess at some point
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:27,
archived)
if it 'stopped in 1998'
why are is the respected, peer-reviewed journal new scientist amongst others still publishing editorials and scientific articles on the subject?
here
here
here
see how easy that was to find a list of articles ruining the pseudo-science of rubbishing the reality of global warming? stop acting like a child and realise we are all resposible for our actions, and may have to clean up someone else's mess at some point
errrrr
"the respected, peer-reviewed journal new scientist"
WHAT? don't get me wrong, i'm not even beginning to pretend that global warming "stopped in 1998" because that's just crazy talk, but calling new scientist "peer reviewed" or, indeed, a journal is pretty crazy talk itself. "respected" is also a bit of a push. "readable" is certainly true, but respectable's perhaps a bit far. and it most certainly isn't peer-reviewed, it's a magazine. the only review is the sub-editor followed by the editor if he's not out for a ten hour lunch with someone.
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:47,
archived)
WHAT? don't get me wrong, i'm not even beginning to pretend that global warming "stopped in 1998" because that's just crazy talk, but calling new scientist "peer reviewed" or, indeed, a journal is pretty crazy talk itself. "respected" is also a bit of a push. "readable" is certainly true, but respectable's perhaps a bit far. and it most certainly isn't peer-reviewed, it's a magazine. the only review is the sub-editor followed by the editor if he's not out for a ten hour lunch with someone.
oh ok
i did expand it to a few other journals, mind. thought the old NS might seem a bit tertiary college
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:55,
archived)
ah didn't check the links
nature's pretty sound, though their news section is more or less the same as ns and scientific american. come to that, from my limited experience scientific american seems a bit more grounded than ns.
the main thing is peer-review -- you get that in journals publishing scientific papers. ns, nature's news service and scientific american are all magazines specialising in scientific journalism which is usually based on peer-reviewed articles but can really be whatever they want. and what they want is to sell copies, which is why ns is normally very entertaining and should not be totally believed as mainstream.
errr, i'm stepping off the soapbox now and putting on a dvd before bed...... night all
( ,
Sat 31 May 2008, 0:04,
archived)
the main thing is peer-review -- you get that in journals publishing scientific papers. ns, nature's news service and scientific american are all magazines specialising in scientific journalism which is usually based on peer-reviewed articles but can really be whatever they want. and what they want is to sell copies, which is why ns is normally very entertaining and should not be totally believed as mainstream.
errr, i'm stepping off the soapbox now and putting on a dvd before bed...... night all
didn't even click
can just about make out what's being posted here, but lots of text goes all swirly, like.
even the keys on mt keyboard keep moving in fron t of me
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:57,
archived)
even the keys on mt keyboard keep moving in fron t of me
bloody hell dude
*ushers towards sofa* before you pass out/spew EVERYWHERE
( ,
Sat 31 May 2008, 0:03,
archived)
and as proof
i forgot to comp it...
EDIT: alcohol works, all known errors fixed, see changelog, in /locked filing cabinet in basement
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 22:58,
archived)
EDIT: alcohol works, all known errors fixed, see changelog, in /locked filing cabinet in basement
If this is a replacement, why not just edit your original post and replace that image with this one?
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:00,
archived)
so
everyone can see the magnitude of my fuckings-up
actually, the first one seems to have changed (wasn't me)
i am ris
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:01,
archived)
actually, the first one seems to have changed (wasn't me)
i am ris
i wish i could believe you
i may just delete this thread and we can all pretend it never happened
( ,
Fri 30 May 2008, 23:05,
archived)