Reply to A Lucas

Reply to Willi Semmler's and Lucas Bernard's Comments

On several of the arguments put forward in the above “Comments . . .”, I feel in agreement with Semmler and Bernard. But we probably do not share exactly the same point of view on a couple of questions. The quality of their “Comments . . .” appears precisely because distinguishing between these two categories of issues can be accomplished without any ambiguity. I take up the 5 points above succ...

A Problem in Avicennas View on the Origination of the Soul and a Reply to It

A Reply to Pickering

I felt I should reply to Andy Pickering’s short Response to my long Review of his book; I did not want to leave it uncontested in the literature.1 I will pick up a couple of points from his comments to indicate just what it is that he has failed to grasp about my Review. If these points are understood, then all else falls into place. Though Pickering writes that my critical remarks ‘form a disc...

A Reply to

A reply to

The Lazarus and Bewley [2005, LB05] evaluation of the Archer and Jacobson [2003, AJ03] methodology was designed to examine various sensitivities of a wind power parameterization that was applied globally to estimate 80 m wind power. Their original work has since been updated in a sequence of papers which has, in part, resulted in a reduction of their original power estimates due to some changes...