Yeah, I'm following up with Massaria, who said there's a "problem" with the recording.
By "questioning" there, she mean "doubting", not "verifying". In her mind those are very different things.What is so bad about questioning sources?
It doesn't necessarily mean discarding them. It merely means checking their veracity and trustworthyness. Only if you are afraid of questioning your own beliefs can you be afraid of that.
Here:I'm working on a more comprehensive review of global dimming and brightening. It's an interesting topic, lots of local variation. But the key thing is that in North America, there has been consistent brightening.
Dane often quotes a figure of 22%. Turns out that's a figure for one location in Israel, between 1950 and 1990. So nothing at all to do with his solar panel degradation.
Not only that, but she has since been cheering peekay on about it:The fact that Peekay came out later and said he had no intention of debating, but had only intended to attack, speaks volumes. Madison stood by, having asked for politeness, and never said a word about his opening statement being so utterly impolite.
If John Massaria needs help getting an audio file online, probably you could host it here, Mick.Yeah, I'm following up with Massaria, who said there's a "problem" with the recording.
Yeah, I don't think that's the problem. This delay on releasing it makes it look like he never wanted to release it in the first place, and so made the story about the virus. That's the perception his actions give. I'd be happy to be proven wrong by him just releasing the audio.Let me suggest, ehm, Linux.
Ohhh.... HE told you to delete your audio file? Curiouser and curiouser.....Yeah, I don't think that's the problem. This delay on releasing it makes it look like he never wanted to release it in the first place, and so made the story about the virus. That's the perception his actions give. I'd be happy to be proven wrong by him just releasing the audio.
Oh. I guess I was confused. You DO have a copy still? If so.. EGG-cellent!No, he asked me not to record it, but I was concerned that something like this might happen, so I made a backup copy, intending to delete it as soon as he released his copy. And yes, it would be the exact same thing as his copy that he claimed he was going to release into the public domain.
It's not as if people were unaware they were being recorded. At the start Massaria says
I don't want to post it yet, as I'd prefer Massaria to release it.
I'd like a transcript anyway. If they claim the transcript is wrong, then I can just release the audio. The transcript can be corrected by them. It would then provide a mutually agreed upon record of what was said (which is not always clear in the audio due to connection problem).I think you should release it as actual audio. Then nobody can claim you altered anything when transcribing.
There was not too much attitude in the whole thing. I was a bit exasperated at times, and John got a bit plaintive, Dane was pretty steady, almost intense. But mostly plain speaking.This is interesting. Once you get into the flow of the "reading" format....it works quite well.
Because when reading, it eliminates verbal inflections and attitude. This may be a benefit, or a detriment....at certain points in the discussion.
I like it where he tells Mick what he isn't allowed to say about the matter: "...and don't say that the guy was a UFO guy or whatever."I don't think it's quite a fair discussion. They seem to be driving it and are familiar with the details of whatever paper or sub topic they bring up.
I also am amused with the theory that if a word exists (chemtrails) then that mean geoengineering is taking place in the form of thousands of planes spraying [something or other] every day.