louploup2
on October 2, 2019 at 8:10 pm said:
rogerlewis: You’ve got chutzpah posting that video of denier propaganda. I stopped watching at 1:20 when “The Heartland Institutute” quoting Richard Lindzen showed up. Seriously?

rogerglewis
on October 3, 2019 at 11:17 am said:
louploup2 Your religious rhetoric is quite telling. On AGW CO2 Hypothesis it is falsified, a busted flush, a hackneyed old meme from eugenicist maniacs, cooked up by an anti-human misanthropic group of megalomaniac psycho paths. In your eyes that maybe makes me a denier. The word denier is to me obnoxious and smacks of the hard of thinking nonsense spouted by Climate religion fanatics. Glad we cleared that up.

louploup2
on October 3, 2019 at 6:30 pm said:
I’m curious; why do you follow and spend time commenting on ‘surplus energy economics’? Tim Morgan’s work represents a similar approach to reality that you seem incapable of with respect to climate science—critical thinking. Another aspect of Dr. Morgan’s work that I suspect you are oblivious to is the application of the laws of thermodynamics to analyses of energy and economic systems. These come into focus around the closely interrelated ecological and economic crises, which linked by energy use. This post (# 155) as well #27 and #73 touch on the significance of thermodynamics in that regard.

As is typical with climate deniers, when called out you have nothing coherent to say, retreating to name calling. Conclusion: Now I know how much weight to give your comments critiquing others.

Will!
on October 3, 2019 at 7:11 pm said:
I select the “Notify me of new comments via email” and “Notify me of new posts via email” options when posting in order to follow discussions in the comments by e-mail. This allows me to delete comments from commenters in whom I am not interested without reading them.

rogerglewis
on October 3, 2019 at 6:58 pm said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
@Loup I have been reading Tims blog for quite a few years I am a keen scholar on Monetary reform and share the criticisms of Frederick Soddy as relates to usury and money creation. Soddy you will know wasa Nobel prize-winning Chemist.
I understand the science perfectly well and what’s more Loup I am an expert on FFT analysis and as such understand the climate models as well as most Climat physicists, most of the bed wetting climate advocates failed long division in high school. That’s the real problem I have a mathematics-based analytical degree designate BSc, I am a Chartered surveyor by profession but have not practised since I sold a company and retired when I was in my late 30’s I am now in my mid 50’s.
When I say the AGW CO2 Hypothesis is falsified I use those words in the sense of scientific falsification ( Popper). So Loup you see it is possible to agree on some things with other people for different reasons I admire Tims work and see Seeds as an excellent tool heading towards the implementation of Wes Freeberg’s Quanta Big apple plan. I have also played with Garvin Boyle models from Orrery Software, and enjoyed a correspondence with him,

https://orrery-software.webs.com/entropy-in-abms

https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/02/02/heisenberg-godel-and-chomsky-walk-into-a-bar-neo-classical-economics-is-the-joke/

It’s difficult to know where to start as your comment is actually breathtakingly superficial, suffice to say I have been studying this area of political economy and science seriously for over 10 years full time. My Blog sets out what I have been up to and exactly who I am. WHo you are and how seriously and deeply you have delved into Energy Economics is not known to me.
Hope that helps-.