Sorry, but Svensmark has long been debunked , by simply showing the data after his cut-off date he omitted because his beautiful correlation went to shit. And we are not talking about models slightly disagreeing with future data, we see massive discrepancies in data readily available when the claim was made.

And of course your little - how would you call it - PROPAGANDA blog makes big claims I'll counter with mine:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/cern-cloud-proves-cosmic-rays-causing-global-warming.htm

CERN scientist Jasper Kirkby, about his recent cosmic ray experiment:

"At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it's a very important first step"

But what about now? Well, instead of a "warming hiatus", according to the Gospel of Svensmark we should actually see massive cooling: Cosmic Rays Hit Space Age High

"In 2009, cosmic ray intensities have increased 19% beyond anything we've seen in the past 50 years," says Richard Mewaldt of Caltech.

Was 2009 anywhere near the coldest year since the 1959? No? Then we can just forget about including Cosmic Voodoo Rays in any climate models if we want them to be acceptable to you.

Wait, what? "Private currencies"? Is that something like ocean shells? PostIts with "IOU" written on them? Look at non-cash payment system and who does and who doesn't support which combination of them, and tell me something like an unregulated private currency could work. Even as a reasonable alternative to a real currency, let alone as an replacement. And don't even get me started on "gold currency".

The problem with FREE free markets is, that they don't work. Period.

Yeah, I have asome wires crossed because you have no fucking clue about what you are talking about on several levels. What the hell do you think we are talking about here? Why don't you tell is, if you please?

Here's a critic of an other of his books - the title says it all: http://blog.rongarret.info/2013/03/murray-rothbard-was-idiot.html " I read The Ethics of Liberty and found it completely, utterly, and transparently intellectually bankrupt. "

Which price did they arrive at? Oh, yeah, right. You are blowing smoke. There was no fixed price. Let alone that prices fell everywhere but at Amazon which was selling at a loss before.

And coincidently it's the way Amazon's own Kindle Direct Publishing works - just that they took 60% initially before Apple ruined their business model.

Very interesting indeed - and all without mentioning the word "radiation" anywhere in its text.

So you admit you have no idea what we (let alone you yourself) are talking about.

And even that paper acknowledges that there was warming in that period. Why don't you?

You hate reality. When Greenpeace first issued its "Guide to Greener Electronics" report in 2006 they gave Apple bad marks, because they didn't give out any information on their environmental policies, while giving good marks to the likes of HP because they promised to stop using certain chemicals. IOW they made up their scores on the PR blurbs by the companies, instead of their actions.

http://technicalconclusions.wordpress.com/2007/05/13/greenpeace_apple/

Next year they had to up Apple's score because they had long stopped using those chemicals, while HP's actually dropped because they didn't follow through.

Things like spreading falls claims of aggression, or rumors of WMDs. Selling arms to both sides.

But you are actually complaining that if you ship directly from China to Uruguay, you should still pay US corporation tax on it.

Liar, liar crotch on fire. Apple paid over 6 billion $ US-taxes in 2012, and 1.5 billion from 2009 to 2012 in Ireland.

So there were no more ebooks at Amazon for 99 cents? Prove it or we know you are lying.

BTW, there are Books on the iBook Store for 99 cents. Obviously Apple only keeps Amazon from selling ebooks cheap. It's fucking magic.

And Snowden is a traitor. Fuck you, and the company that pays you to post here.