Comments on: Rahmstorf Reamed

By: davids99us

davids99us — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:42:59 +0000

Goes to show whats worth doing is worth doing badly.

Geoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:04:25 +0000

And now he's elected a fellow of the AGU (see http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/in-short/stefan-… )

Anonymous — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:42:00 +0000

Goes to show whats worth doing is worth doing badly.

Geoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:04:00 +0000

davids99us — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:42:59 +0000

Goes to show whats worth doing is worth doing badly.

Geoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:04:25 +0000

And now he's elected a fellow of the AGU (see http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/in-short/stefan-… )

Anonymous — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:18:00 +0000

“Fig. 3. The duel model in …”

Does anybody proof-read this dreck?

Geoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:52:00 +0000

Now Rahmstorf is writing in PNAS citing his own 2007 article without dealing with any of the issues raised ( see http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21527.full?sid=bbc45345-7cb5-4e61-924e-7ee0a4c880e7

davids99us — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:18:23 +0000

“Fig. 3. The duel model in …”Does anybody proof-read this dreck?

Geoff — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:52:06 +0000

Now Rahmstorf is writing in PNAS citing his own 2007 article without dealing with any of the issues raised ( see http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21527.full?s…