peer review.

nicepants said:
Please explain the difference between your definitions of

"Independent verification" and "peer-review".

Can an independent verification be part of a peer-review?
Can a peer-review be part of an independent verification?
Click to expand...

Took a while for that penny to drop didn't it.:rolleyes:
 
LashL said:
But can you legitimately discuss Brazil in that time frame without mentioning the horrific and nearly catastrophic financial failure that it faced in that time period? Without discussing the reality that required locals to, literally, lug suitcases of currency to do their weekly grocery shopping after the devaluation of the cruzeiro and the switch to the cruzado? Without discussing how the life savings of every day, hard-working, normal, middle class people went from (in relative terms) the equivalent of $100,000 to $100 overnight?

It was very, very ugly.
Click to expand...

The fact that they became energy independent in spite of the catastrophic financial failure is all the more stunning as to why we haven't done it. One of the reasons they had the financial problems was due to importing nearly 80% of their oil in the 1970's when the first shortages occurred.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
realcddeal said:
For anyone who doubts that Brazil is essentially energy independent today below are a couple of articles you should read.

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003961.html

http://www.truthabouttrade.org/article.asp?id=5029

It is a shame that some of the posts on here aren't peer reviewed. It was implied that I was lying about this by a certain individual posting in this thread.
Click to expand...

Lying? No, I said you were wrong. Learn the difference, and when you refer to a forum member, be a man and do so directly.

When you're told by people who give a damn about getting things right, that you're wrong, you should pay attention.

Brazil Imports of Crude Oil, 2006
426,800 barrels/day. Increase over 2005: 1.7%

Brazil Imports of Refined Products, 2006
337,900 barrels/day. Increase over 2005: 3.7%

Brazil Imports of Natural Gas, 2006
9.46 billion cubic meters. Increase over 2005: 7.4%

Source: OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin, p. 94-96, July 31, 2007. Link to pdf

Give me a ring when you decide to get anything right. Anything at all.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Lying? No, I said you were wrong. Learn the difference
Click to expand...

That's rich ! Although I am new here, even I know that you often call someone a liar when in fact that person is, at most, mistaken.

Oh, by the way, "Brazil's reliance on oil imports has plummeted from 85 percent of its energy consumption in 1978 to nearly zero, (2006) "
 
TerryUK said:
That's rich ! Although I am new here, even I know that you often call someone a liar when in fact that person is, at most, mistaken.
Click to expand...

IF your mom tells you that trash pickup is on the 7th and you need to get it to the curb on time, and you miss it, saying "I thought today was the 5th" are you lying?
No. you were mistaken, or ill-informed
IF your mom tells you that trash pickup is on the 7th and you need to get it to the curb on time, shows you the calender, pointing out that today is the 6th, and that tomorrow is the 7th, and you miss it, saying "I thought today was the 5th" are you lying?
yes. The truth was pointed out to you, and you ignored it.
Oh, by the way, "Brazil's reliance on oil imports has plummeted from 85 percent of its energy consumption in 1978 to nearly zero, (2006) "
Click to expand...
"Nearly" does not equal "is"
available the data was. Ignored and mirepresented it also was.
 
Last edited:
rwguinn said:
"Nearly" does not equal "is"
available the data was. Ignored and mirepresented it also was.
Click to expand...

You see, you just want to win , even at the expense of being dishonest in your argument...
The post from realcddeal about Brazil's oil was presenting a fair picture of the facts. Gravy wanted to make him look wrong.
If Gravy was being fair, he would have admitted that what realcddeal said was a reasonably accurate statement.
But no, he had to start nit-picking.

You say : "Nearly" does not equal "is"
In this particular case, you know perfectly well that your 'nit-picking' is exactly that, and therefor dishonest.

Unfortunately,that's one of the problems with some people on this forum.
 
TerryUK said:
That's rich ! Although I am new here, even I know that you often call someone a liar when in fact that person is, at most, mistaken.
Click to expand...
Prove it. Or are you lying?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom