Tuesday, July 1, 2008

Adam Shand site - worth a look

Adam Shand was the reporter on the Sunday programme which aired last weekend and tried to point out that AGW was a con. I was looking to see if I could find more about him. Have a look around this site, I just did and there's an amazing photo of a tornado.... poke around it's interesting. (Particularly if you're a computer person...) I don't think it's the Adam Shand I was looking for.


Anonymous said...

Definitely not the Adam Shand you were looking for. I'm the nerd Adam Shand ... he's the reporter Adam Shand.

He's been slowly catching up on my Google ranking for years. PAH! :-)

kae said...

Nevermind, I'm sure there's one or two computer nerds who'd be interested (but I suppose if they're dedicated they'd have found you already?).

That tornado pic is great. I thought it was worth a look.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, it's awesome! I have a couple more here:




kae said...

Wow, Adam. They're great.

Don't think I'd like to be on that boat with that storm coming!

Adam Shand the lesser said...

Hey Ad, Thanks for taking some of the heat on this climate change thing! I just hope you don't get whacked if people think you are me!

kae said...

Should I change my name to Adam Shand?
Just wondering which is which here.
Oh Noeeees! I'm confuzed.

Anonymous said...

Hey Adam,

Nice to finally hear from you. You keep my Google Alerts pretty busy these days :-)

You based in Melbourne? I'm just over the ditch in Wellington.

Adam (the nerd, not the reporter).

stopmyabortion said...

Adam the reporter's the one who has no idea if January in Sydney is hotter than June in Sydney...right?


Anonymous said...

Hi Adam, I want to come and say hi some time. I think you are really doing the name proud, with some very ingenious and insightful work.
And to the person who thinks I don't know summer from winter...the point is that if you are talking about 1815/16 the summer was INDEED cooler than the winter, ha bloody ha - such things are not always predictable...science is full of anomalies that overturn assumption! And that is just one 200-year period! Anyway sick of pointing out the bleedingly obvious to people! My point is that science should never work on consensus to the extent where competing views are not tested or funded. I was amazed at the gaps in our basic knowledge of the climate system. This does not equal being, dare I say it, a denier, merely pro-knowledge.
Anyway Adam, drop me a telephone number (ashand@nine.com.au) and I will give you a call. Thanks for putting up with my trashing of a very good name!
Adam, the nerdy reporter (that will really confuse them)