Naval History Forums

paul.mercer wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:33 am

Gentlemen,
Your opinions please.
Was president Trump correct in pulling out US troops from Syria ?

Yes

I would be raising a glass if the UK had a clean break from the EU, which isn't quite what we will get on 31 January 2020. There is a transition process running for the following eleven months which means the UK won't be truly free of the EU before the start of 2021. Even after that we cannot be sur...

I think the salient factor with these ''what ifs'' is that in 1945 the USA develops the atom bomb. The remaining question is against which enemy it is deployed against first. I would suggest that the world, going forward to 2019, would be very similar to what we have in reality, with the USA as sole...

Further to my last post I have been reminded that the ''climate change'' lobby have been active now for more than 30 years. Various company AGM's that I attend are showing increasing emphasis on zero or neutral carbon policies that the scam promotes and as industry is pushed in to this direction you...

I don't think Mussolini was all bad by any means. ….. and he did make the trains run on time. He also restored a bit of respect for Italy. Up to 1936 - yes. From then on it was all downhill, particulary with the growing corruption and inefficiencies of a government in power for too long, with no co...

I don't think Mussolini was all bad by any means. He almost wiped out the Mafia That was completely undone by his decision on 11 December 1941 to declare war on the United States. Unlike his entry into WW2 in June 1940 that decision was made in the context of what clearly was a major long lasting w...

These MP's are all elected by UK voters. The key question is - will the voters throw them out at the next General Election? Without a credible and properly organised Brexit Party this isn't going to happen, these MP's know it and because they can get away with it they will carry on as they are. The ...

She doesn't want withdrawal. The ''withdrawal agreement'' she is trying to push through Parliament would create the fiction of withdrawal by removing all UK representation in the EU while the UK remains fully subject to EU law and pays in to the EU budget until the year 2064. There would be no right...

Nearly three years on and we are still not leaving.

There is of course a useful cliché here - the one about empty vessels making the loudest noise. Nothing in life is simple and we need genuine scientific enquiry to understand the environment we live in. Rather unlike the one individual who insisted that carbon dioxide would fry the world and then co...

Thank you for posting this.

Another aspect to this is that all the higher education institutions in the UK receive their taxpayer funding via the European Union, which is partly why that institution is also promoting the AGW bubble.

Anti-AGW is certainly hostile to academic freedom and free speech. Resolute efforts to silence climate science are deplorable. This is a complete and utter load of twaddle - and encapsulates exactly what the AGW lobbyists want people to believe because there is no coherent basis for AGW. It is in t...

Which proves the point - you have nothing constructive to contribute.

....I'm still confused. :? Lobbying and promotion as you say is nothing new and I think you are looking at it rather simplistically. Scientists like everyone else have to earn a living and we all live in a competitive world. Its not so much that people deliberately set out to defraud, not at least ...

OpanaPointer wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:05 pm

Scientists are the most likely to out bad science. Duffers, not so much.

They do - when they get the exposure. I have already mentioned Dr David Bellamy and Johnny Ball.