Discussion:
A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988
(too old to reply)
kensi
2018-04-07 14:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
Sergio
2018-04-07 14:48:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>
> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>

<yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
kensi
2018-04-07 15:23:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>
>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>
> <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's

And yet, still you refuse to believe.

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
Sergio
2018-04-07 15:33:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 10:23 AM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>
>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>
>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>


> And yet, still you refuse to believe.
>

you confirm climate change is a religion.
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Kensi replied:
> > > GlobalNews.CA/news/4127757/shell-Climate-Change-Report-1988/
> >
> > <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>
> And yet, still you refuse to believe.

Kensi is following "The Cult Leader's Handbook", by David Koresh;
" Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! ".
Siri Cruise
2018-04-08 00:51:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <Jeff-***@Apr.7--0.05pm.Seattle.2018>, Jeff-Relf.Me @. wrote:



In article <***@news4.newsguy.com>, "F. Russell" <***@random.info>
wrote:

Subject: Re: Print to a .PDF file.



Is there a reason these two threads showed up at the same time?

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
%
2018-04-08 01:26:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2018-04-07 5:51 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <Jeff-***@Apr.7--0.05pm.Seattle.2018>, Jeff-Relf.Me @. wrote:
>
>
>
> In article <***@news4.newsguy.com>, "F. Russell" <***@random.info>
> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Print to a .PDF file.
>
>
>
> Is there a reason these two threads showed up at the same time?
>
yep
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Mr. "persent" and "Siri Cruise" wrote:
> [ Jeff Relf is Fabian Russell ]

I'll add "paranoid schizophrenia" to your list of disablities.
Recently, I told Fabian:

Bezos is too rich from his stupid, GirlyBoy website to care
about your private "distro" that's ( assembly language ) optimized
for your (MachoMan) PDP-11.

Also, he doesn't care enough to write apps for your Androids,
iPhones, Macs, iPads, ChromeBooks, Kindles, and Windows boxen.
Remember when everyone thought Bill Gates had a monopoly ? !
%
2018-04-08 03:52:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2018-04-07 8:40 PM, Jeff-***@. wrote:
> Mr. "persent" and "Siri Cruise" wrote:
>> [ Jeff Relf is Fabian Russell ]
>
> I'll add "paranoid schizophrenia" to your list of disablities.
> Recently, I told Fabian:
>
> Bezos is too rich from his stupid, GirlyBoy website to care
> about your private "distro" that's ( assembly language ) optimized
> for your (MachoMan) PDP-11.
>
> Also, he doesn't care enough to write apps for your Androids,
> iPhones, Macs, iPads, ChromeBooks, Kindles, and Windows boxen.
> Remember when everyone thought Bill Gates had a monopoly ? !
>
who are you and what do you want
Siri Cruise
2018-04-08 04:00:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@news.alt.net>, % <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2018-04-07 8:40 PM, Jeff-***@. wrote:
> > Mr. "persent" and "Siri Cruise" wrote:
> >> [ Jeff Relf is Fabian Russell ]
> >
> > I'll add "paranoid schizophrenia" to your list of disablities.
> > Recently, I told Fabian:
> >
> > Bezos is too rich from his stupid, GirlyBoy website to care
> > about your private "distro" that's ( assembly language ) optimized
> > for your (MachoMan) PDP-11.
> >
> > Also, he doesn't care enough to write apps for your Androids,
> > iPhones, Macs, iPads, ChromeBooks, Kindles, and Windows boxen.
> > Remember when everyone thought Bill Gates had a monopoly ? !
> >
> who are you and what do you want

Give me all your oreos or I will this hostage with my water pistola.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Nadegda
2018-04-08 04:05:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt!
On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 21:00:48 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:

> Give me all your oreos or I will this hostage with my water pistola.

Go ahead. Shoot her. The Wicked Witch of the West means nothing to me.

--
FNVWe Nadegda

Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct
question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
%
2018-04-08 04:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2018-04-07 9:05 PM, Nadegda wrote:
> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt!
> On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 21:00:48 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:
>
>> Give me all your oreos or I will this hostage with my water pistola.
>
> Go ahead. Shoot her. The Wicked Witch of the West means nothing to me.
>
just watch out a house doesn't get dropped on you
%
2018-04-08 04:06:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2018-04-07 9:00 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <***@news.alt.net>, % <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-04-07 8:40 PM, Jeff-***@. wrote:
>>> Mr. "persent" and "Siri Cruise" wrote:
>>>> [ Jeff Relf is Fabian Russell ]
>>>
>>> I'll add "paranoid schizophrenia" to your list of disablities.
>>> Recently, I told Fabian:
>>>
>>> Bezos is too rich from his stupid, GirlyBoy website to care
>>> about your private "distro" that's ( assembly language ) optimized
>>> for your (MachoMan) PDP-11.
>>>
>>> Also, he doesn't care enough to write apps for your Androids,
>>> iPhones, Macs, iPads, ChromeBooks, Kindles, and Windows boxen.
>>> Remember when everyone thought Bill Gates had a monopoly ? !
>>>
>> who are you and what do you want
>
> Give me all your oreos or I will this hostage with my water pistola.
>
can i find out who it is and what they want first
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
2018-04-08 05:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Siri Cruise wrote:

> Give me all your oreos or I will this hostage with my water pistola.

This joke is a verb.

Also, *please* stop crossposting without Followup-To.


PointedEars
--
Q: What did the nuclear physicist order for lunch?
A: Fission chips.

(from: WolframAlpha)
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2018-04-08 15:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:05:08 -0700 (Seattle), Jeff-Relf.Me @. wrote:

>Kensi replied:
>> > > GlobalNews.CA/news/4127757/shell-Climate-Change-Report-1988/
>> >
>> > <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>
>> And yet, still you refuse to believe.
>
>Kensi is following "The Cult Leader's Handbook", by David Koresh;
>" Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! ".

There's only two things kensi follows: The Yellow
Brick Road and Karl Marx. Oh, wait a minute,
there's one more - PeeWee Herman's "Big Book
of Astronomy."

<titter>

--

Yours Truly,
Gregory Hall

"Tsk, tsk. No one appreciates his brilliance, poor fellow.
(There might be a message in that for him.)"--Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries

http://apprhondaleahkirkfries.blogspot.com/2014/05/rhonda-leah-kirk-fries-interview.html
kensi
2018-04-08 16:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 11:54 AM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
> There's only two things kensi follows: The Yellow
> Brick Road and Karl Marx. Oh, wait a minute,
> there's one more - PeeWee Herman's "Big Book
> of Astronomy."
>
> <titter>

I know you are, but what am I?

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
Sergio
2018-04-09 00:33:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 11:29 AM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 11:54 AM, Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq. wrote:
>> There's only two things kensi follows: The Yellow
>> Brick Road and Karl Marx.  Oh, wait a minute,
>> there's one more -  PeeWee Herman's "Big Book
>> of Astronomy."
>>
>> <titter>
>
> I know you are, but what am I?
>




you 'pupa'



did you forget ? that is OK, most pupas do forget a lot.
Scout
2018-04-10 01:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"kensi" <***@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:paanpq$1k7a$***@gioia.aioe.org...
> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>
>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>
>> <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>
> And yet, still you refuse to believe.

Believe what?

That climate change is occurring, or that this particular time it can only
be man's fault?
Sergio
2018-04-10 13:32:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 8:06 PM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "kensi" <***@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:paanpq$1k7a$***@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
>>>> the
>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be.
>>>> ...
>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>
>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>
>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>
>> And yet, still you refuse to believe.
>
> Believe what?
>
> That climate change is occurring, or that this particular time it can
> only be man's fault?
>
>

it is woman's fault, demanding more from men.
benj
2018-04-07 15:43:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>
>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>
>
> <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>
Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
going up.

Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with cigarettes
where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
Sergio
2018-04-07 17:34:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 10:43 AM, benj wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>
>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>
>>
>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>
> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
> and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
> going up.
>
> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
> over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
> oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with cigarettes
> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
> products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.

BINGO !!! lawyer time !!

What else in the long term lawyer horizon lawsuits ?
Sergio
2018-04-07 17:52:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 12:34 PM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 10:43 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>
>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>
>>>
>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>
>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
>> and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
>> going up.
>>
>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
>> over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
>> oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with cigarettes
>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
>> products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>
> BINGO !!! lawyer time !!
>
> What else in the long term lawyer horizon lawsuits ?
>

Democrates sues themselves, because they knew they are corrupt or should
have known.
Just Wondering
2018-04-07 17:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/7/2018 9:43 AM, benj wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>
>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>
>>
>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>
> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
> and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
> going up.
>
> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
> over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
> oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with cigarettes
> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
> products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.

How to be a prophet.
1. Make predictions on all possible outcomes.
2. When one comes true, point it out.
3. Ignore all the predictions that don't come true.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-08 06:55:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 8/04/2018 3:58 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 9:43 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
>>>> the
>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be.
>>>> ...
>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>
>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>
>>>
>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>
>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey
>> stick" stopped going up.
>>
>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>> selling oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with
>> cigarettes where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies
>> always knew their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>
> How to be a prophet.
> 1.  Make predictions on all possible outcomes.
> 2.  When one comes true, point it out.
> 3.  Ignore all the predictions that don't come true.
>

**Except that ALL the climatologists have to been telling us that the
planet is warming. Since the mid 19th century, in fact.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Scout
2018-04-10 01:10:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Trevor Wilson" <***@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:***@mid.individual.net...
> On 8/04/2018 3:58 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:43 AM, benj wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
>>>>> the
>>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be.
>>>>> ...
>>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of
>>>>> climate
>>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>>
>>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
>>> and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
>>> going up.
>>>
>>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
>>> over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
>>> oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with cigarettes
>>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
>>> products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>>
>> How to be a prophet.
>> 1. Make predictions on all possible outcomes.
>> 2. When one comes true, point it out.
>> 3. Ignore all the predictions that don't come true.
>>
>
> **Except that ALL the climatologists have to been telling us that the
> planet is warming. Since the mid 19th century, in fact.

Odd, I recall during the 1960s & 1970s how there was global cooling and it
was projected that the next Ice Age was just around the corner.

Oh, but THOSE climatologists don't count in Jones' World.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-11 20:40:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 11:10 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Trevor Wilson" <***@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>> On 8/04/2018 3:58 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:43 AM, benj wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows
>>>>>> that the
>>>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would
>>>>>> be. ...
>>>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of
>>>>>> climate
>>>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>>>
>>>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>>>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>>>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature
>>>> "hockey stick" stopped going up.
>>>>
>>>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>>>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>>>> selling oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did with
>>>> cigarettes where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies
>>>> always knew their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>>>
>>> How to be a prophet.
>>> 1.  Make predictions on all possible outcomes.
>>> 2.  When one comes true, point it out.
>>> 3.  Ignore all the predictions that don't come true.
>>>
>>
>> **Except that ALL the climatologists have to been telling us that the
>> planet is warming. Since the mid 19th century, in fact.
>
> Odd, I recall during the 1960s & 1970s how there was global cooling and
> it was projected that the next Ice Age was just around the corner.

**Yeah, except that prediction was never made by any scientific journal
on the planet. It was a NEWSWEEK article. All the scientific journals
were busily publishing papers that related to the greenhouse effect and
the probability that the planet would warm. I should remind you at this
point, that Newsweek is not a scientific journal of note.

>
> Oh, but THOSE climatologists don't count in Jones' World.

**The article was not written by a climatologist.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-11 23:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/11/2018 4:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 11:10 AM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <***@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 8/04/2018 3:58 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:43 AM, benj wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows
>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would
>>>>>>> be. ...
>>>>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of
>>>>>>> climate
>>>>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>>>>
>>>>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>>>>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>>>>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature
>>>>> "hockey stick" stopped going up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>>>>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always"
>>>>> knew selling oil would end all life on the planet. Just as they did
>>>>> with cigarettes where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco
>>>>> companies always knew their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>>>>
>>>> How to be a prophet.
>>>> 1.  Make predictions on all possible outcomes.
>>>> 2.  When one comes true, point it out.
>>>> 3.  Ignore all the predictions that don't come true.
>>>>
>>>
>>> **Except that ALL the climatologists have to been telling us that the
>>> planet is warming. Since the mid 19th century, in fact.
>>
>> Odd, I recall during the 1960s & 1970s how there was global cooling
>> and it was projected that the next Ice Age was just around the corner.
>
> **Yeah, except that prediction was never made by any scientific journal
> on the planet. It was a NEWSWEEK article. All the scientific journals
> were busily publishing papers that related to the greenhouse effect and
> the probability that the planet would warm. I should remind you at this
> point, that Newsweek is not a scientific journal of note.

Come on, Trevor, Newsweek is quoted by Dr. "kensi" as proof all the
time. It doesn't get more educated than 'her'!

>>
>> Oh, but THOSE climatologists don't count in Jones' World.
>
> **The article was not written by a climatologist.

** So long as a climatologist is quoted...er I mean mentioned, it counts
as science and proof.
>
>
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-08 06:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote:
> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>
>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>
>>
>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>
> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by journalists
> and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey stick" stopped
> going up.

**No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of 'climate
change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it as 'global
warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was climate change,
which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be done, or should be
done to deal with it.

What is a "wormballer"?


>
> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear all
> over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew selling
> oil would end all life on the planet.

**Like Exxon's hushed up reports?


Just as they did with cigarettes
> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew their
> products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.

**Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that their
products did not harm humans. Some still do.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Sergio
2018-04-08 14:04:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 1:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
>>>> the
>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be.
>>>> ...
>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>
>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>
>>>
>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>
>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey
>> stick" stopped going up.
>
> **No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of 'climate
> change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on
> Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it as 'global
> warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was climate change,
> which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be done, or should be
> done to deal with it.
>
> What is a "wormballer"?

google for it, we're spoonfeeding McGinn this week.

>
>
>>
>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>> selling oil would end all life on the planet.
>
> **Like Exxon's hushed up reports?
>
>
>  Just as they did with cigarettes
>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew
>> their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>
> **Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that their
> products did not harm humans. Some still do.
>
>
kensi
2018-04-08 15:29:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 10:04 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 1:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> What is a "wormballer"?
>
> google for it,

All I get is gross results about the mating habits of annelids.

Try again.

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
benj
2018-04-08 16:22:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 11:29 AM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 10:04 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 1:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> What is a "wormballer"?
>>
>> google for it,
>
> All I get is gross results about the mating habits of annelids.
>
> Try again.
>
Come on, "kensi" just lay back and enjoy the "science"!
Sergio
2018-04-08 16:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 10:29 AM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 10:04 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 1:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> What is a "wormballer"?
>>
>> google for it,
>
> All I get is gross results about the mating habits of annelids.
>

google got you in your 'google bubble'. clear cashe first

> Try again.
>

why are you kensi, spoon feeding Trevor ?


here are some more sippies;

https://www.facebook.com/public/Worm-Ball?_fb_noscript=1

https://www.teaparty.org/unreal-climate-alarmists-caught-red-handed-faking-sea-level-rise-humiliating-280382/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/worm-balls-baffle-park-rangers-in-texas-1.2406385
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/105671-climate-alarmist-calls-burning-down.html


https://pioneeringthesimplelife.org/2016/03/08/worm-ball-composting/

"Night of The Living Wormballer."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/05/31/sorry-global-warming-alarmists-the-earth-is-cooling/#4f6ef8ac3de0
benj
2018-04-08 16:17:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 2:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
>>>> the
>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be.
>>>> ...
>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>
>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>
>>>
>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>
>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey
>> stick" stopped going up.
>
> **No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of 'climate
> change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on
> Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it as 'global
> warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was climate change,
> which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be done, or should be
> done to deal with it.

Climate has been changing since was climate, but being used by you
scammers as a propaganda term to cover up the sudden lack of "hockey
stick" is new. I'll wait here while you "prove" you "won" by showing me
how long the words "climate" and"change" have been in the dictionary.
You really are a pathetic crook.

> What is a "wormballer"?

I love making you lib kooks dance! A misspelling ropes you in every time
doesn't it? It must be sad to have a life where you total useful
knowledge is spelling, grammar and how to tell lies.

>>
>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>> selling oil would end all life on the planet.
>
> **Like Exxon's hushed up reports?
>
Got a VP sold out yet to parade on TV? Worked for Tobacco and can work
here, right?

>
>  Just as they did with cigarettes
>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew
>> their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>
> **Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that their
> products did not harm humans. Some still do.

Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.

Lies are all you know Trevor which is why it is a total waste of time
trying to hold a sane conversation with you.
kensi
2018-04-08 16:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.

Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.

*snicker*

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
benj
2018-04-09 03:46:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>
> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>
> *snicker*
>
Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
people dead! You all need to be banned!

If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
smoked their whole life who don't have it. It's funny that science
doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs and your fantasies do.

A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking in
a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut back on
pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven effect. You
libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your stupidity
scorches the earth.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 04:10:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 1:46 PM, benj wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>
>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>>
>> *snicker*
>>
> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
> people dead! You all need to be banned!
>
> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
> smoked their whole life who don't have it.


**Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer". SMOKING tobacco products
increases one's risk of acquiring a smoking related disease. That
includes a variety of cancers.

It's funny that science
> doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs and your fantasies do.

**Actually, science does know what causes SOME cancers. Science does not
know what causes ALL cancers.


>
> A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking in
> a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut back on
> pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven effect.

**Wrong. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas.


You
> libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your stupidity
> scorches the earth.

**There you go again: Displaying your stupidity for all to see.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-09 15:28:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 12:10 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 1:46 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>>
>>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>>>
>>> *snicker*
>>>
>> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
>> people dead! You all need to be banned!
>>
>> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
>> smoked their whole life who don't have it.
>
>
> **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer". SMOKING tobacco products
> increases one's risk of acquiring a smoking related disease. That
> includes a variety of cancers.
>
>  It's funny that science
>> doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs and your fantasies do.
>
> **Actually, science does know what causes SOME cancers. Science does not
> know what causes ALL cancers.
>
>
>>
>> A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking
>> in a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut
>> back on pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven
>> effect.
>
> **Wrong. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas.
>
>
>  You
>> libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your
>> stupidity scorches the earth.
>
> **There you go again: Displaying your stupidity for all to see.
>
>
You libs call truth "stupidity"because you are stupid.
benj
2018-04-09 15:32:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 12:10 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 1:46 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>>
>>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>>>
>>> *snicker*
>>>
>> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
>> people dead! You all need to be banned!
>>
>> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
>> smoked their whole life who don't have it.
>
>
> **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer". SMOKING tobacco products
> increases one's risk of acquiring a smoking related disease. That
> includes a variety of cancers.
>
>  It's funny that science
>> doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs and your fantasies do.
>
> **Actually, science does know what causes SOME cancers. Science does not
> know what causes ALL cancers.
>
>
>>
>> A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking
>> in a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut
>> back on pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven
>> effect.
>
> **Wrong. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas.

Libs never do quantity. Trevor says "if one life is saved it is worth
it" Doesn't matter if a million die as a result. Libs pretend it's all
the same. The Questions dear dumbass, is not whether CO2 IS a greenhouse
gas but rather how much effect it has. Science says it's a MINOR
greenhouse gas of little effect. Science is about measurements and
quantity. This is why you know no science at all, press boy.
Sergio
2018-04-09 16:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 11:10 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 1:46 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>>
>>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>>>
>>> *snicker*
>>>
>> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
>> people dead! You all need to be banned!
>>
>> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
>> smoked their whole life who don't have it.
>
>
> **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer".

wrong. Tobacco companies were sued and lost because tobacco causes cancer.

> SMOKING tobacco products
> increases one's risk of acquiring a smoking related disease. That
> includes a variety of cancers.

in your own words; "increasing ones risk of getting cancer is causing
cancer".

Tobacco and Marijuana, both cause cancer, pot causes bipolar
personalities in teenagers.



>
>  It's funny that science
>> doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs and your fantasies do.
>
> **Actually, science does know what causes SOME cancers. Science does not
> know what causes ALL cancers.
>
>
>>
>> A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking
>> in a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut
>> back on pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven
>> effect.
>
> **Wrong. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas.
>
>
>  You
>> libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your
>> stupidity scorches the earth.
>
> **There you go again: Displaying your stupidity for all to see.
>
>
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> > **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer".
>
> wrong. Tobacco companies were sued
> and lost because tobacco causes cancer.

Air causes cancer; breath too much of it, and you're dead.

Cocaine caused the AIDS epidemic, I think;
cocaine and coffee wear down the immune system.

For liability reasons, doctors _must_ treat cancer,
even when they know that the cancer might be dormant,
depending on the immune system.
benj
2018-04-09 21:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 1:54 PM, Jeff-***@. wrote:
>>> **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer".
>>
>> wrong. Tobacco companies were sued
>> and lost because tobacco causes cancer.
>
> Air causes cancer; breath too much of it, and you're dead.
>
> Cocaine caused the AIDS epidemic, I think;
> cocaine and coffee wear down the immune system.
>
> For liability reasons, doctors _must_ treat cancer,
> even when they know that the cancer might be dormant,
> depending on the immune system.
>
So that means that all doctors MUST treat all smokers, former smokers,
and people who have been exposed to secondary smoke! Wow! This is WAY
better than ObamaCare! Hey you know I used to smoke. Wait till I tell my
doctor he MUST treat me.
Skeeter
2018-04-09 19:12:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:05:02 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:

>Tobacco and Marijuana, both cause cancer, pot causes bipolar
>personalities in teenagers.


Bullshit, proof please.
Sergio
2018-04-09 19:29:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 2:12 PM, Skeeter wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:05:02 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> Tobacco and Marijuana, both cause cancer, pot causes bipolar
>> personalities in teenagers.
>
>
> Bullshit, proof please.
>

this was known at least 10 years ago in all the mental health circles,
and affects teens the most, many for a lifetime, have them avoid it as
long as possable. I think it makes about 1 in 5 teens bipolar/manic
depending how often how strong, and how young.
If your over 60, who cares ? they will blame it on old age....

it is well known, the kookNorml sites will dis it. Because there is BIG
money to be made, especially in the Democratic States.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811144/

https://psychcentral.com/news/2015/03/15/how-cannabis-affects-bipolar-disorder/82314.html

https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/marijuana-addiction/marijuana-bipolar-can-marijuana-cause-bipolar/

https://www.mentalhelp.net/blogs/marijuana-makes-it-worse-severe-mental-illnesses/

In other words, we now know that cannabis consumption and mania are
linked; it doesn’t necessarily means that one causes another, but that’s
definitely possible. The research also showed that in people already
suffering from mania, the symptoms are greatly exacerbated.



and the other street drugs are bad. Meth is very bad, even Medical Meth.
Skeeter
2018-04-09 19:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 14:29:49 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:

>On 4/9/2018 2:12 PM, Skeeter wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:05:02 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Tobacco and Marijuana, both cause cancer, pot causes bipolar
>>> personalities in teenagers.
>>
>>
>> Bullshit, proof please.
>>
>
>this was known at least 10 years ago in all the mental health circles,
>and affects teens the most, many for a lifetime, have them avoid it as
>long as possable. I think it makes about 1 in 5 teens bipolar/manic
>depending how often how strong, and how young.
>If your over 60, who cares ? they will blame it on old age....
>
>it is well known, the kookNorml sites will dis it. Because there is BIG
>money to be made, especially in the Democratic States.
>
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811144/
>
>https://psychcentral.com/news/2015/03/15/how-cannabis-affects-bipolar-disorder/82314.html
>
>https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/marijuana-addiction/marijuana-bipolar-can-marijuana-cause-bipolar/
>
>https://www.mentalhelp.net/blogs/marijuana-makes-it-worse-severe-mental-illnesses/
>
>In other words, we now know that cannabis consumption and mania are
>linked; it doesn’t necessarily means that one causes another, but that’s
>definitely possible. The research also showed that in people already
>suffering from mania, the symptoms are greatly exacerbated.
>

So many people smke dope these day that you can claim many symtoms on
it. I been smoking it for 45 years with no probs..
.<hey! what was that? nevermind>
>
>
>and the other street drugs are bad. Meth is very bad, even Medical Meth.


So true, TINMM
Sergio
2018-04-09 21:44:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 2:33 PM, Skeeter wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 14:29:49 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/9/2018 2:12 PM, Skeeter wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:05:02 -0500, Sergio <***@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tobacco and Marijuana, both cause cancer, pot causes bipolar
>>>> personalities in teenagers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bullshit, proof please.
>>>
>>
>> this was known at least 10 years ago in all the mental health circles,
>> and affects teens the most, many for a lifetime, have them avoid it as
>> long as possable. I think it makes about 1 in 5 teens bipolar/manic
>> depending how often how strong, and how young.
>> If your over 60, who cares ? they will blame it on old age....
>>
>> it is well known, the kookNorml sites will dis it. Because there is BIG
>> money to be made, especially in the Democratic States.
>>
>> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811144/
>>
>> https://psychcentral.com/news/2015/03/15/how-cannabis-affects-bipolar-disorder/82314.html
>>
>> https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/marijuana-addiction/marijuana-bipolar-can-marijuana-cause-bipolar/
>>
>> https://www.mentalhelp.net/blogs/marijuana-makes-it-worse-severe-mental-illnesses/
>>
>> In other words, we now know that cannabis consumption and mania are
>> linked; it doesn’t necessarily means that one causes another, but that’s
>> definitely possible. The research also showed that in people already
>> suffering from mania, the symptoms are greatly exacerbated.
>>
>
> So many people smke dope these day that you can claim many symtoms on
> it. I been smoking it for 45 years with no probs..
> .<hey! what was that? nevermind>

yea, I think the warnings are out for the adolescents while brain is
growing, and its chemestry is changing on about 20% of them, doesnt
seem to effect the other 80%, or affect older people over 30, except for
the smoke in the lungs thing that they will find out about in a few
years. Alcohol is addictive to about 20% of the population, the other
80% not so much. then there is the addictive internet, electronic
games, gambleing, and FaceBook.... for some, kids and cellphones...



>>
>>
>> and the other street drugs are bad. Meth is very bad, even Medical Meth.
>
>
> So true, TINMM
>
Nadegda
2018-04-09 04:33:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt!
On Sun, 08 Apr 2018 23:46:30 -0400, benj wrote:

> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote:
>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>
>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj.
>>
>> *snicker*
>
> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for
> people dead! You all need to be banned!

If you think cigarettes are safe, then you cannot interpret kensi's
suggestion as a death threat.

On the other hand if you think they are unsafe, your post that she was
quoting is revealed to be intentionally dishonest ... and by implication,
also your climate change denial, thus causing you to have implicitly
conceded that human-caused climate warming is happening.

Either way, you lose.

SPNAK!

<snicker>

> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who
> smoked their whole life who don't have it.

And he flip-flops again!

But I'll bite.

Perhaps they simply got lucky?

> It's funny that science doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs
> and your fantasies do.

Science knows a great deal about what causes cancer. Mutations to somatic
cell DNA and epigenetics. Damage to chromosomes. Clonal evolution. Etc.

> A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking in
> a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut back on
> pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven effect.

Wrong!

> You libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your
> stupidity scorches the earth.

No, kooky, it's your smokestacks' emissions that are scorching the earth,
but we're going to make you stop.

<snicker>

--
FNVWe Nadegda

Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct
question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-08 20:17:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 2:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows
>>>>> that the
>>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would
>>>>> be. ...
>>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of
>>>>> climate
>>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>>
>>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey
>>> stick" stopped going up.
>>
>> **No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of
>> 'climate change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental
>> Panel on Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it as
>> 'global warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was
>> climate change, which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be
>> done, or should be done to deal with it.
>
> Climate has been changing since was climate,

**And again, my scientifically ignorant friend: The average temperature
of this planet is rising at a rate which is at least 100 times more
rapid than at any time in at least the past million years. It is the
speed that the warming is occurring that is of most concern.


but being used by you
> scammers as a propaganda term to cover up the sudden lack of "hockey
> stick" is new. I'll wait here while you "prove" you "won" by showing me
> how long the words "climate" and"change" have been in the dictionary.
> You really are a pathetic crook.

**Your answer has already been provided, you moronic cunt. The IPCC was
established in 1988.


>
>> What is a "wormballer"?
>
> I love making you lib kooks dance!

**No, you're just an idiot.


A misspelling ropes you in every time
> doesn't it?

**What is a "wormballer"? If it has been misspelled, then supply the
correct spelling.


It must be sad to have a life where you total useful
> knowledge is spelling, grammar and how to tell lies.

**It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting
to establish what you actually believe.


>
>>>
>>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>>> selling oil would end all life on the planet.
>>
>> **Like Exxon's hushed up reports?
>>
> Got a VP sold out yet to parade on TV? Worked for Tobacco and can work
> here, right?

**Huh? What the fuck are you talking about?

>
>>
>>   Just as they did with cigarettes
>>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew
>>> their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>>
>> **Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that their
>> products did not harm humans. Some still do.
>
> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.

**WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html

Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer. SMOKING cigarettes will expose the
smoker to a much greater risk of contracting a bunch of smoking related
diseases. See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why
I know that you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline. You
write sloppily and make insane statements, which are trivially easy to
demolish.


>
> Lies are all you know Trevor which is why it is a total waste of time
> trying to hold a sane conversation with you.

**You are incapable of such a conversation, because that would require
you to be sane. Since you aren't, I am the only one left in the
conversation who is sane and understands scientific principles.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
2018-04-08 23:43:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Trevor Wilson amok-crossposted to 3 newsgroups:

> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>
> **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html
>
> Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer.

JFYI, out of the 98 substances with toxicological properties that are
contained in tobacco smoke, like carbon monoxide (Talhout et al., 2011),
*at least* 7(!) are carcinogenic (cancer-promoting). In order of decreasing
toxicity (IUPAC name in parentheses):

Acrolein (propenal), formaldehyde (methanal), acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene,
acetaldehyde (ethanal), ethylene (ethene) oxide, and isoprene (2-methyl-1,3-
butadiene) (Cunningham et al., 2011).

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking#Physiology> p.

> SMOKING cigarettes will expose the smoker to a much greater risk of
> contracting a bunch of smoking related diseases.

Because of the above, an increased occurrence of cancer among (heavy)
smokers (and, it can be reasonably assumed, *non*-smokers regularly exposed
to tobacco smoke) cannot simply be attributed to environmental or secondary
health effects.

> See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why I know that
> you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline.

Pot calling the kettle black. For example, livescience.com is _not_ a
scientific journal (and known here for oversimplification in at least one of
its articles), and the article that you are citing is 10 years(!) old.

In order to be considered a scientist, you have to exhibit much more
humility and scepticism, and do a lot more research, than you are doing.


F‘up2 sci.physics

PointedEars
--
“Nature uss only the longest threads to weave her patterns
so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization
of the entire tapestry.”
—Richard Feynman, theoretical physicist, “Messenger Lecture” 1 (1964)
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-08 23:57:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 9:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Trevor Wilson amok-crossposted to 3 newsgroups:
>
>> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>>
>> **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html
>>
>> Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer.
>
> JFYI, out of the 98 substances with toxicological properties that are
> contained in tobacco smoke, like carbon monoxide (Talhout et al., 2011),
> *at least* 7(!) are carcinogenic (cancer-promoting). In order of decreasing
> toxicity (IUPAC name in parentheses):
>
> Acrolein (propenal), formaldehyde (methanal), acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene,
> acetaldehyde (ethanal), ethylene (ethene) oxide, and isoprene (2-methyl-1,3-
> butadiene) (Cunningham et al., 2011).
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking#Physiology> p.
>
>> SMOKING cigarettes will expose the smoker to a much greater risk of
>> contracting a bunch of smoking related diseases.
>
> Because of the above, an increased occurrence of cancer among (heavy)
> smokers (and, it can be reasonably assumed, *non*-smokers regularly exposed
> to tobacco smoke) cannot simply be attributed to environmental or secondary
> health effects.
>
>> See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why I know that
>> you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline.
>
> Pot calling the kettle black. For example, livescience.com is _not_ a
> scientific journal (and known here for oversimplification in at least one of
> its articles), and the article that you are citing is 10 years(!) old.
>
> In order to be considered a scientist, you have to exhibit much more
> humility and scepticism, and do a lot more research, than you are doing.


**Tell you what: AFTER you critique the prior poster for his inane and
completely inaccurate statements (which are numerous and regular), I
will express some humility.

Particularly with reference to this statement:

"Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming."

'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come out
with the insane statement referenced above.

So, I ask again: Why critique my (mostly correct) comments and ignore
benj's insanity?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
2018-04-09 00:02:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Trevor Wilson wrote:

> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity?

I did not.


PointedEars
--
Q: What happens when electrons lose their energy?
A: They get Bohr'ed.

(from: WolframAlpha)
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 00:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 10:02 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>
>> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity?
>
> I did not.

**Then feel free to post your response. I must have missed it.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Sergio
2018-04-09 00:36:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 7:12 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 10:02 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity?
>>
>> I did not.
>
> **Then feel free to post your response. I must have missed it.
>
>

he is/was already free.


by your own admission, you missed it.
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
2018-04-09 01:45:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Trevor Wilson wrote:

> On 9/04/2018 10:02 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity?
>> I did not.
>
> **Then feel free to post your response. I must have missed it.

You have missed that, by refuting your claims and source, I have also
refuted the corresponding claim of “benj”, whom you quoted and I have
in my killfile.

Trying to convince an ignorant is a waste of time. Trying to convince a
misguided person might be, too, but it is worth it. Informing the general
public is always a good idea.


Prefixing your own text with two asterisks is uncommon and unnecessary here.

Address munging is anti-social and constitutes a violation of the first of
the “Rules for usage” of your service provider, individual.net, where it
also says: “Disregarding the rules may cause termination of access
privileges without further notice. Amounts paid will not be refunded,
neither partly nor in full.” You have been warned.

I will not read more of your postings until the From header field value of
your postings changes to an appropriate one (for me and others, that is a
value according to RFC 5536, § 3.1.2., different to what individual.net
falsely claims in section 5.3 of its FAQ).

<http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/>

*PLONK*


F’up2 poster

PointedEars
--
Q: What did the nuclear physicist order for lunch?
A: Fission chips.

(from: WolframAlpha)
benj
2018-04-09 03:50:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 8:12 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 10:02 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity?
>>
>> I did not.
>
> **Then feel free to post your response. I must have missed it.
>
>
Trevor, Life is something you've missed. Clean up your act and come join
us!
Lofty Goat
2018-04-09 01:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:

> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
> out with the insane statement referenced above.

Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer. One of his favorite indoor
sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
serious posters foam at the mouth. Although neither crazy nor stupid,
he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.

--
Goat
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 01:40:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>
>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>
> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer. One of his favorite indoor
> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
> serious posters foam at the mouth. Although neither crazy nor stupid,
> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>

**I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
communication with him.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-09 03:56:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>
>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>
>
> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
> communication with him.
>
High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I don't
understand humans. They are morons."

Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such as
yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope for.

I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 04:05:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>
>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>
>>
>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>> communication with him.
>>
> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I don't
> understand humans. They are morons."
>
> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,

**I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.


> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such as
> yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope for.
>
> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!

**I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-09 15:27:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 12:05 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>
>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>
>>>
>>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>>> communication with him.
>>>
>> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I don't
>> understand humans. They are morons."
>>
>> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
>
> **I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
> ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.
>
>
>> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such as
>> yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
>> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope for.
>>
>> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
>
> **I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.
>
>
Nope. You are the dishonest moron here.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 21:36:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 1:27 AM, benj wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 12:05 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>>>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>>>> communication with him.
>>>>
>>> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I
>>> don't understand humans. They are morons."
>>>
>>> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
>>
>> **I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
>> ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.
>>
>>
>>> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such
>>> as yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
>>> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope for.
>>>
>>> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
>>
>> **I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.
>>
>>
> Nope. You are the dishonest moron here.

**What? Because I pose questions you can't answer?

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Sergio
2018-04-09 22:01:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 1:27 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/9/2018 12:05 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>>>>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>>>>> communication with him.
>>>>>
>>>> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I
>>>> don't understand humans. They are morons."
>>>>
>>>> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
>>>
>>> **I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
>>> ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.
>>>
>>>
>>>> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such
>>>> as yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
>>>> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope
>>>> for.
>>>>
>>>> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
>>>
>>> **I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.
>>>
>>>
>> Nope. You are the dishonest moron here.
>
> **What? Because I pose questions you can't answer?
>

you just asked 2 more questions, why so many questions?

does smoking cause cancer? 99% of non-smoking climate doctors say yes.
93% of medical Doctors say yes.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 22:14:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 8:01 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 10/04/2018 1:27 AM, benj wrote:
>>> On 4/9/2018 12:05 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
>>>>> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>>>>>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>>>>>> communication with him.
>>>>>>
>>>>> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I
>>>>> don't understand humans. They are morons."
>>>>>
>>>>> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
>>>>
>>>> **I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
>>>> ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such
>>>>> as yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
>>>>> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope
>>>>> for.
>>>>>
>>>>> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
>>>>
>>>> **I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Nope. You are the dishonest moron here.
>>
>> **What? Because I pose questions you can't answer?
>>
>
> you just asked 2 more questions, why so many questions?

**Because benj makes many, many unsupported claims that require answers.

>
> does smoking cause cancer?

**Smoking leads to an increased likelihood of contracting cancer or some
other smoking related illness.


99% of non-smoking climate doctors say yes.

**Do they? Cite your source for that statistic.

> 93% of medical Doctors say yes.

**Do they? That would be very sloppy language, if they did say that.
Please cite your source for that statistic.



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Lofty Goat
2018-04-10 02:09:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 17:01:25 -0500, Sergio wrote:

> you just asked 2 more questions, why so many questions?

From a friend who is a lawyer:

(Yes, I know, one must hold two contradictory concepts in mind to
understand that phrase.)

"You're a lawyer? How much do you charge to answer questions?"

"Yes, $1,000 for three questions. What's your third question?"

--
Goat
Sergio
2018-04-10 13:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 9:09 PM, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 17:01:25 -0500, Sergio wrote:
>
>> you just asked 2 more questions, why so many questions?
>
> From a friend who is a lawyer:
>
> (Yes, I know, one must hold two contradictory concepts in mind to
> understand that phrase.)
>
> "You're a lawyer? How much do you charge to answer questions?"
>
> "Yes, $1,000 for three questions. What's your third question?"
>

oh!
and so true...
benj
2018-04-10 08:51:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 6:01 PM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 10/04/2018 1:27 AM, benj wrote:
>>> On 4/9/2018 12:05 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 9/04/2018 1:56 PM, benj wrote:
>>>>> On 4/8/2018 9:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>>>>>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>>>>>> communication with him.
>>>>>>
>>>>> High praise from someone from Oz. It's like a gorilla saying, "I
>>>>> don't understand humans. They are morons."
>>>>>
>>>>> Hint: Trevor, Sergio actually possesses science knowledge and ability,
>>>>
>>>> **I am sure Sergio does. YOU, OTOH, do not. You are a scientific
>>>> ignoramus. Sergio's qualifications are not at issue. Yours are.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> something which it is impossible for a journalist-propagandist such
>>>>> as yourself to judge. Trust the opinion of others who are likewise
>>>>> knowledgeable. That's the best a strategic writer like you can hope
>>>>> for.
>>>>>
>>>>> I tell you SErgio "knows sumptin"!
>>>>
>>>> **I'm sure he does. You are the moron here, not Sergio.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Nope. You are the dishonest moron here.
>>
>> **What? Because I pose questions you can't answer?
>>
>
> you just asked 2 more questions, why so many questions?
>
> does smoking cause cancer? 99% of non-smoking climate doctors say yes.
> 93% of medical Doctors say yes.
>
Sergio, propagandist Trevor asks so many questions because he then
doesn't have to provide any answers that he is incapable of providing.
It is Propaganda 101 to keep asking and demanding as if YOU were in
charge to keep the opposition off balance. When it comes to lies and
propaganda make no mistake, Trevor is a pro.

As for Smoking and cancer, sucking combustion products may not be
healthful, but last I heard the actual thing that "causes" cancer is not
in general known. There are things that are known to be some kind of
factors but to say any one of them are the "cause" of cancer is just
unscientific journalist blather. It doesn't matter if 99% of doctors
call it "settled science". Science is not done by taking a poll and
going with the majority vote. If that were true then global warming
"climate change" would actually be science.
Sergio
2018-04-09 16:52:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>
>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>
>
> **I can only judge a person

You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
?? You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).


> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
> words, benj is a moron.

but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
holds superior wisdom over all others.

benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
kensi posts, and most of yours.

you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
of error sources, and so on.

lets face it, you three Trevor, Nads, kensi pupa are "lite weights." Go
play badminton game on your play station.

> I don't know how you can claim that he is
> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
> communication with him.
>
benj
2018-04-09 21:22:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 12:52 PM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>
>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>
>>
>> **I can only judge a person
>
> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
> ?? You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>
>
>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>> words, benj is a moron.
>
> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>
> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>
> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
> of error sources, and so on.
>
> lets face it, you three Trevor, Nads, kensi pupa are "lite weights." Go
> play badminton game on your play station.

Sergio cuts through the crap to the "real" Trevor, Nads and "kensi".
SLAM DUNK!
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 21:36:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>
>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>
>>
>> **I can only judge a person
>
> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
> ?? You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>
>
>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>> words, benj is a moron.
>
> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
> holds superior wisdom over all others.

**Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.

>
> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
> kensi posts, and most of yours.

**Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
comprehend.

>
> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
> of error sources, and so on.

**Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.




--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Sergio
2018-04-09 22:13:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>
>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>
>>>
>>> **I can only judge a person
>>
>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>
>>
>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>
>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>
> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.

you have a website dedicated to yourself.

>
>>
>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>
> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
> comprehend.
>

I am fining you 15 cents for using "scurries" as that word is too old.
scurries ? First recorded in 1800-10; extracted from hurry-scurry.

do you read Scientific American for your Science ? (shameful)


>>
>> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
>> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
>> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
>> of error sources, and so on.
>
> **Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
> instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.

you prefer CNN ? MSNBC ? RT ? FB ? Google Non-Fake News ?
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 22:23:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 8:13 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **I can only judge a person
>>>
>>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
>>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>>
>>>
>>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>>
>>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>>
>> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.
>
> you have a website dedicated to yourself.
>
>>
>>>
>>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
>>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>>
>> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
>> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
>> comprehend.
>>
>
> I am fining you 15 cents for using "scurries" as that word is too old.
> scurries ? First recorded in 1800-10; extracted from hurry-scurry.
>
> do you read Scientific American for your Science ? (shameful)

**Along with Nature, Science and other sources, yes. You need to acquire
your scientific information from sources other than Breitbart and Newsweek.

>
>
>>>
>>> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
>>> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
>>> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
>>> of error sources, and so on.
>>
>> **Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
>> instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.
>
> you prefer CNN ?

**Nope. Don't watch/read it.


MSNBC ?

**Nope. Don't watch/read it.


RT ?

**Dunno what that is.


FB ?

**Dunno what that is.


Google Non-Fake News ?


**No need.

Again, you need to read other sources other than Breitbart, Fox and
Newsweek. Nature and Science would be excellent places to start.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Sergio
2018-04-10 00:43:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 5:23 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 8:13 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> **I can only judge a person
>>>>
>>>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on
>>>> USENET
>>>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>>>
>>>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>>>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>>>
>>> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.
>>
>> you have a website dedicated to yourself.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by
>>>> contract
>>>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>>>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>>>
>>> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
>>> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
>>> comprehend.
>>>
>>
>> I am fining you  15 cents for using "scurries" as that word is too old.
>> scurries ?  First recorded in 1800-10; extracted from hurry-scurry.
>>
>> do you read Scientific American for your Science ?  (shameful)
>
> **Along with Nature, Science and other sources, yes. You need to acquire
> your scientific information from sources other than Breitbart and Newsweek.
>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
>>>> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the
>>>> orgional
>>>> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
>>>> of error sources, and so on.
>>>
>>> **Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
>>> instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.
>>
>> you prefer  CNN ?
>
> **Nope. Don't watch/read it.
>
>
>   MSNBC ?
>
> **Nope. Don't watch/read it.
>
>
>   RT ?
>
> **Dunno what that is.

https://www.rt.com/ they have a different view than mainstream media,
and very good, just skip over the obvious propaganda

>
>
>    FB ?
>
> **Dunno what that is.

facebook -- as they were going to screen out fake news, but that is
impossable for anybody to do. Advertizing is about 80% fake news.

>
>
>    Google Non-Fake News ?
>
>
> **No need.
>
> Again, you need to read other sources other than Breitbart, Fox and
> Newsweek.
>
no, I dont read any of those, propaganda, dont read Time mag. nor
except for

>Nature and Science would be excellent places to start.

they Nature and Science both have been partly politicized, so you have
to screen out their stuff too, but they are ok.

Scientific American is politicized, infested with contract Journalist
who know little of what they report on, they finish an article and sell
it to SA.

I go to the University library (they have 23 on campus) and read the
professional journals, and new book section once a month. most of the
on line stuff is substandard, as someone has munched around.

Physics.org is a muncher.


ANYHOW, there was a good clip on TV tonight, PBS/npr about Zuckerberg
and Cambridge Analytics, and they had some slides from a CA presentation
that use FB data and came out with 5 (?) voter "personality" types, and
that is strongly reflected in this newsgroup. (they make people pay for
that info, so it may not be public on the internet.

so many of the fights in here, fit right in with CA's analysis,

FB and CA, What Trump used, what Obama used, and *our politicians* are
still using it now. try downloading your FB file on companies they
shared your info with, and see if their any politicians...
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-10 01:02:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 10:43 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 5:23 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 10/04/2018 8:13 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **I can only judge a person
>>>>>
>>>>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on
>>>>> USENET
>>>>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>>>>
>>>>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>>>>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>>>>
>>>> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.
>>>
>>> you have a website dedicated to yourself.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by
>>>>> contract
>>>>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>>>>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>>>>
>>>> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
>>>> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
>>>> comprehend.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am fining you  15 cents for using "scurries" as that word is too old.
>>> scurries ?  First recorded in 1800-10; extracted from hurry-scurry.
>>>
>>> do you read Scientific American for your Science ?  (shameful)
>>
>> **Along with Nature, Science and other sources, yes. You need to acquire
>> your scientific information from sources other than Breitbart and Newsweek.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
>>>>> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the
>>>>> orgional
>>>>> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
>>>>> of error sources, and so on.
>>>>
>>>> **Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
>>>> instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.
>>>
>>> you prefer  CNN ?
>>
>> **Nope. Don't watch/read it.
>>
>>
>>   MSNBC ?
>>
>> **Nope. Don't watch/read it.
>>
>>
>>   RT ?
>>
>> **Dunno what that is.
>
> https://www.rt.com/ they have a different view than mainstream media,
> and very good, just skip over the obvious propaganda

**So, no science there. NO interest.

>
>>
>>
>>    FB ?
>>
>> **Dunno what that is.
>
> facebook -- as they were going to screen out fake news, but that is
> impossable for anybody to do. Advertizing is about 80% fake news.

**I don't use FB for anything significant. I might glance at it once
every couple of weeks. I sure don't expect to obtain reliable
information from it.

>
>>
>>
>>    Google Non-Fake News ?
>>
>>
>> **No need.
>>
>> Again, you need to read other sources other than Breitbart, Fox and
>> Newsweek.
>>
> no, I dont read any of those, propaganda, dont read Time mag. nor
> except for

**You sure fooled me. You've cited some seriously dodgy sites.


>
>> Nature and Science would be excellent places to start.
>
> they Nature and Science both have been partly politicized, so you have
> to screen out their stuff too, but they are ok.

**Both are high quality, journals of note.


>
> Scientific American is politicized, infested with contract Journalist
> who know little of what they report on, they finish an article and sell
> it to SA.

**SCIAM is also a high quality, journal of note.

>
> I go to the University library (they have 23 on campus) and read the
> professional journals, and new book section once a month. most of the
> on line stuff is substandard, as someone has munched around.
>
> Physics.org is a muncher.
>
>
> ANYHOW, there was a good clip on TV tonight, PBS/npr about Zuckerberg
> and Cambridge Analytics, and they had some slides from a CA presentation
> that use FB data and came out with 5 (?) voter "personality" types, and
> that is strongly reflected in this newsgroup. (they make people pay for
> that info, so it may not be public on the internet.
>
> so many of the fights in here, fit right in with CA's analysis,
>
> FB and CA, What Trump used, what Obama used, and *our politicians* are
> still using it now. try downloading your FB file on companies they
> shared your info with, and see if their any politicians...

**No interest thanks. There are far more reliable sources. Far more
reliable than Watts Up for instance.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-10 08:58:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 6:23 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 8:13 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/9/2018 4:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor
>>>>>> stupid,
>>>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> **I can only judge a person
>>>>
>>>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on
>>>> USENET
>>>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>>>
>>>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>>>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>>>
>>> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.
>>
>> you have a website dedicated to yourself.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by
>>>> contract
>>>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>>>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>>>
>>> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
>>> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
>>> comprehend.
>>>
>>
>> I am fining you  15 cents for using "scurries" as that word is too old.
>> scurries ?  First recorded in 1800-10; extracted from hurry-scurry.
>>
>> do you read Scientific American for your Science ?  (shameful)
>
> **Along with Nature, Science and other sources, yes. You need to acquire
> your scientific information from sources other than Breitbart and Newsweek.

Yeah, Sergio, you need to read honest to god science journals like
SciAm, Time, NYTimes, Post, view CNN & MSNBC and for real definitive
proof of anything climate read the science by the failed cartoonist at
SkepticalScience.com. Trevor does.

These "sources" give you lots of "real science" quotes from actual
climate scientists!
benj
2018-04-10 08:40:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 5:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 2:52 AM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 8:40 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>>
>>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer.  One of his favorite indoor
>>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>>> serious posters foam at the mouth.  Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>>>
>>>
>>> **I can only judge a person
>>
>> You go around judging people on the internet by what they post on USENET
>> ??    You a either a moron, or shallow thinker (you choose).
>>
>>
>>> by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>>> words, benj is a moron.
>>
>> but Trevor, you already judged yourself as the supremiest person, who
>> holds superior wisdom over all others.
>
> **Did I? Got a cite for that? I'll wait while you find it.
>
>>
>> benj openly questions the validity of scientific conclusions by contract
>> journalists who have little to no credentials. Like almost all links
>> kensi posts, and most of yours.
>
> **Nope. benj is a moron, who wouldn't know real science from Breitbart.
> Worse, benj scurries away from discussions that exceed his ability to
> comprehend.
>
>>
>> you kesni pupa, Nads all respond with twists and turns and change the
>> subject, correct engrlish, without being able to understand the orgional
>> data sets, the math needed, nor the specific computer models, analysis
>> of error sources, and so on.
>
> **Says the person who cites right wing news sites and Anthony Watts
> instead of real science. This would be a pot, kettle, black moment.

Trevor descends into journalist blather. Calling people ignorant (the
worst slam a Lib can think of) and when Sergio and I post actual
scientific papers and Trevor "scurries away" he then posts paid
journalist screed and calls it "quoting climate scientists". And of
course he then claims that we "scurried away" by pointing out his
dishonest drool.

Trevor like all scammers you are just a waste of time and perfectly good
skin and we could give a shit that you don't "like" us. Your opinion is
totally without any redeeming value.

Trevor Troll, take your agenda elsewhere.
Lofty Goat
2018-04-10 02:08:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:40:35 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:

>On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>
>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer. One of his favorite indoor
>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>> serious posters foam at the mouth. Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>
> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
> communication with him.

I've been reading science newsgroups for... what? Twenty years maybe,
twenty-five years for the computer science groups, something like that.
This one for maybe sixteen or seventeen.

Sooner or later one sorts out the trolls from the crackpots. However
careful they are, now and then the trolls slip up and exhibit at least a
scintilla of lucidity. The crackpots never do.

It's a plain-text medium. There just aren't that many tells. Give it
time.

--
Goat
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-10 02:40:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 12:08 PM, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:40:35 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>
>> On 9/04/2018 11:12 AM, Lofty Goat wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:57:03 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come
>>>> out with the insane statement referenced above.
>>>
>>> Ben is, as I recall, a retired engineer. One of his favorite indoor
>>> sports is posting nonsense to the physics groups so he can watch the
>>> serious posters foam at the mouth. Although neither crazy nor stupid,
>>> he does have a pretty weird sense of humor.
>>
>> **I can only judge a person by their words and deeds. Judged by his
>> words, benj is a moron. I don't know how you can claim that he is
>> anything else, unless you know him, or have enjoyed a private
>> communication with him.
>
> I've been reading science newsgroups for... what? Twenty years maybe,
> twenty-five years for the computer science groups, something like that.
> This one for maybe sixteen or seventeen.
>
> Sooner or later one sorts out the trolls from the crackpots. However
> careful they are, now and then the trolls slip up and exhibit at least a
> scintilla of lucidity. The crackpots never do.
>
> It's a plain-text medium. There just aren't that many tells. Give it
> time.
>

**Will do.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> I've been reading science newsgroups for... what? Twenty years maybe,
> twenty-five years for the computer science groups, something like that.
> This one for maybe sixteen or seventeen.

I wrote my first newsreader in 1991, Seattle, 27 years ago.

> Sooner or later one sorts out the trolls from the crackpots.
>
> However careful they are, now and then the trolls slip up
> and exhibit at least a scintilla of lucidity.
> The crackpots never do.

Ben Jacoby is neither funny nor informative, nothing good.
Sergio
2018-04-09 00:34:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 3:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 2:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote:
>>>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows
>>>>>> that the
>>>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would
>>>>>> be. ...
>>>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of
>>>>>> climate
>>>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <yawn>   it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's
>>>>>
>>>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report
>>>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by
>>>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature
>>>> "hockey stick" stopped going up.
>>>
>>> **No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of
>>> 'climate change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental
>>> Panel on Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it
>>> as 'global warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was
>>> climate change, which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be
>>> done, or should be done to deal with it.
>>
>> Climate has been changing since was climate,
>
> **And again, my scientifically ignorant friend: The average temperature
> of this planet is rising at a rate which is at least 100 times more
> rapid than at any time in at least the past million years. It is the
> speed that the warming is occurring that is of most concern.
>
>
>  but being used by you
>> scammers as a propaganda term to cover up the sudden lack of "hockey
>> stick" is new. I'll wait here while you "prove" you "won" by showing
>> me how long the words "climate" and"change" have been in the
>> dictionary. You really are a pathetic crook.
>
> **Your answer has already been provided, you moronic cunt. The IPCC was
> established in 1988.
>
>
>>
>>> What is a "wormballer"?
>>
>> I love making you lib kooks dance!
>
> **No, you're just an idiot.
>
>
>  A misspelling ropes you in every time
>> doesn't it?
>
> **What is a "wormballer"? If it has been misspelled, then supply the
> correct spelling.
>
>
>  It must be sad to have a life where you total useful
>> knowledge is spelling, grammar and how to tell lies.
>
> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting
> to establish what you actually believe.
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear
>>>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew
>>>> selling oil would end all life on the planet.
>>>
>>> **Like Exxon's hushed up reports?
>>>
>> Got a VP sold out yet to parade on TV? Worked for Tobacco and can work
>> here, right?
>
> **Huh? What the fuck are you talking about?
>
>>
>>>
>>>   Just as they did with cigarettes
>>>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew
>>>> their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101.
>>>
>>> **Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that
>>> their products did not harm humans. Some still do.
>>
>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science
>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming.
>
> **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html
>
> Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer. SMOKING cigarettes will expose the
> smoker to a much greater risk of contracting a bunch of smoking related
> diseases. See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why
> I know that you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline. You
> write sloppily and make insane statements, which are trivially easy to
> demolish.


Bill Clinton didn't inhale.
kensi
2018-04-09 14:52:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/8/2018 4:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:

[snip most of epic SPNAKage of ko0ky benj]

Keep up the good work!

> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting
> to establish what you actually believe.

There's no such thing as "what benj actually believes". High-RWA types
like him outsource ontological queries to the likes of Fox News and
Breitbart, rather than build their own in-house ontologies and query
those. He quite literally does not *have* a worldview. Nor does Trump,
nor do the lot of them. It's part of what makes them such kOoks.

Instead they have external "fonts of truth(iness)" on speed-dial, with
maybe some internal caching. But this caching isn't a true self-managed
ontology, because they do no gardening of it, as is apparent when (as
always) it ends up being a mass of contradictions and
empirically-invalidated nonsense (such as climate change denial).

See: https://theauthoritarians.org/donald-trump-and-authoritarian-followers/

"They are highly dogmatic. Because /they have mainly gotten their
beliefs from the authorities in their lives, rather than think things
out for themselves/, they have no real defense when facts or events
indicate they are wrong. So they just dig in their heels and refuse to
change."

(emphasis added)

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here." ~Checkmate
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
2018-04-09 14:59:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:52:03 -0400, circumcised pro-semitic cunt kensi
<***@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote:

>On 4/8/2018 4:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>
>[snip most of epic SPNAKage of ko0ky benj]
>
>Keep up the good work!
>
>> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting
>> to establish what you actually believe.
>
>There's no such thing as "what benj actually believes". High-RWA types
>like him outsource ontological queries to the likes of Fox News and
>Breitbart, rather than build their own in-house ontologies and query
>those. He quite literally does not *have* a worldview. Nor does Trump,
>nor do the lot of them. It's part of what makes them such kOoks.
>
>Instead they have external "fonts of truth(iness)" on speed-dial, with
>maybe some internal caching. But this caching isn't a true self-managed
>ontology, because they do no gardening of it, as is apparent when (as
>always) it ends up being a mass of contradictions and
>empirically-invalidated nonsense (such as climate change denial).
>
>See: https://theauthoritarians.org/donald-trump-and-authoritarian-followers/
>
>"They are highly dogmatic. Because /they have mainly gotten their
>beliefs from the authorities in their lives, rather than think things
>out for themselves/, they have no real defense when facts or events
>indicate they are wrong. So they just dig in their heels and refuse to
>change."
>
>(emphasis added)

STFU cunt.
--

"You are full of shit. You'll never convince any of us real Jews that
there is no Jewish look. I know my people and I can see their
Jewishness. Susan is not a Jew. If you want to get down her panties
just ask her she'll let you. She's a non-Jew."
Message-ID: <bfbdb526-1042-4e8e-a39f-***@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>

"You can try all you want and get all the plastic surgery you want but
you'll never look like one of us because you are not a Jew. You are
an Irish Shiksa that Isn't even a righteous non-Jew a Ger Tzadeck You
are VEEDMUS amongst us and are a gentile. I would not be surprised if
you ever go to Eretz Israel and spout off your non-senseical lies that
a Jew doesn't kill you or a gentile murder you. You are wicked because
you antagonize and lie about the Tzadeckim. The best place for you is
scrubbing toilets and urinals in a gymnasium that is predominate used
by Negros."
Message-ID: <ee17d097-89f7-4e72-a41a-***@p2g2000prn.googlegroups.com>

- drug-fucked jew wannabe Y-chi Netfish, mocking neo-jew Suzy KKKohen's
attempted 'conversion' to the jew race

"Warren is not well. He's a non-Jewish mental patient who usually declines to
take his medications. Please keep this in mind when viewing future posts."
Message-ID: <JZQTk.1726$***@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>

- neo-jew 'convert' Suzy KKKohen, mocking drug-fucked jew wannabe Y-chi Netfish's
claim to be a jew
Michael Ejercito
2018-04-09 18:05:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
aliash)" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

>On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:52:03 -0400, circumcised pro-semitic cunt kensi
><***@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote:

>>On 4/8/2018 4:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>>
>>[snip most of epic SPNAKage of ko0ky benj]
>>
>>Keep up the good work!
>>
>>> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting
>>> to establish what you actually believe.
>>
>>There's no such thing as "what benj actually believes". High-RWA types
>>like him outsource ontological queries to the likes of Fox News and
>>Breitbart, rather than build their own in-house ontologies and query
>>those. He quite literally does not *have* a worldview. Nor does Trump,
>>nor do the lot of them. It's part of what makes them such kOoks.
>>
>>Instead they have external "fonts of truth(iness)" on speed-dial, with
>>maybe some internal caching. But this caching isn't a true self-managed
>>ontology, because they do no gardening of it, as is apparent when (as
>>always) it ends up being a mass of contradictions and
>>empirically-invalidated nonsense (such as climate change denial).
>>
>>See:
>>https://theauthoritarians.org/donald-trump-and-authoritarian-followers/
>>
>>"They are highly dogmatic. Because /they have mainly gotten their
>>beliefs from the authorities in their lives, rather than think things
>>out for themselves/, they have no real defense when facts or events
>>indicate they are wrong. So they just dig in their heels and refuse to
>>change."
>>
>>(emphasis added)

>STFU cunt.
She has no credibility on these newsgroups.

Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change

The blessings of climate change
by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
December 6, 2017

POINT HOPE, ALASKA, is tiny and ill-provisioned, an Arctic backwater so
inaccessible that basic groceries have to be flown in and gasoline can only
be brought in by barge during the summer. The town is remote not only
geographically, but also digitally: Its internet connection is so slow that
teachers must spend hours downloading course material that most of us could
pull off the internet in minutes.


Because of climate change, the once-forbidding sea route through the Arctic
Circle has been opening up sooner and for a longer period each summer.
But Point Hope's luck is changing. High-speed internet is coming, and with
it the benefits of ties to the world: Improved education and health care,
more options for consumers, new customers for local artists, and a chance to
attract tourists.

All thanks to global warming.

The New York Times reported Sunday that Quintillion, a global communications
company, is taking advantage of melting sea ice to build a faster digital
link between Europe and Asia by positioning high-speed internet cables
beneath the Arctic Ocean. Until recently, cable-laying ships couldn't get
too far north, but climate change has meant less ice north of the Bering
Strait. Consequently, Point Hope is now a stop on Quintillion's shipping
route, and the company is supplying the town with broadband service. That
means a better life for residents of one of the nation's most isolated
communities.

In the church of climate alarmism, there may be no heresy more dangerous
than the idea that the world will benefit from warming. Zealous preachers
seek to scare their flock with forecasts of catastrophe, horror, and threats
to civilization. Anyone who demurs is denounced as an apostate: an
anti-science "denier."

But the truth — the inconvenient truth, to coin a phrase — is that while
climate change brings negatives, it brings positives too. Polar melting may
cause dislocation for those who live in low-lying coastal areas, but it will
also lead to safe commercial shipping in formerly inhospitable northern
seas, and to economic opportunity for high-latitude residents in places like
Point Hope.

Shifts in climate are like shifts in the economy: They invariably spell good
news for some and bad news for others. Falling interest rates are a blessing
to homebuyers but a curse to savers; a strong dollar helps consumers buying
imports but hinders exporters selling abroad. In the same way, changes in
climate generate winners and losers. Some of global warming's effects will
be disagreeable; others will be very welcome.

Worldwide, cold kills 20 times as many people as heat, so a warming planet
will save lives. A plethora of data confirms the greater deadliness of cold
weather, even in countries with very different climate patterns. One study
of mortality rates, for example, found that deaths from cold outnumbered
those from heat by a ratio of 33-to-2 in Australia, and 61-to-3 in Britain.
Of 2,000 weather-related deaths in America tallied by the Centers for
Disease Control, 63 percent were caused by excessive cold vs. 31 percent
caused by excessive heat.

A warming planet will also be a greener planet. Is a greener planet. Rising
levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have already led to "persistent
and widespread increase" in leaf cover — i.e., greening — across as much as
half of the world's vegetated regions, according to a study published in
Nature last year.


Over the past 35 years, there has been an increase in world greenery equal
in area to twice the continental United States. Some of Africa's most
inhospitable deserts have begun to bloom again.
Alarmists mindlessly condemn atmospheric CO2 as "carbon pollution," but
carbon dioxide is essential to the health and grown of plant life.

NASA satellites show that over the past 35 years, there has been an increase
in world greenery equal in area to twice the continental United States.
Climate change has been a particular blessing in Africa, where the "Sahel
greening" has significantly reduced famine.

The effects of climate change range from the obvious (lower heating bills)
to the subtle (more habitat for moose and endangered sharks). Territory
formerly deemed too forbiddingly cold will grow more temperate — and
valuable. Delicacies from lobster to blueberries may become more plentiful.

Bottom line? Global warming will bring gains as well as losses, upsides no
less than downsides. Climate science isn't a black-and-white morality tale.
Our climate discourse shouldn't be either.

(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe).


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Sn!pe
2018-04-09 18:19:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

["kensi"]

> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>
> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>
> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>

That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe <***@gmail.com>

My pet rock Gordon just is.
Sergio
2018-04-09 18:36:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 1:19 PM, Sn!pe wrote:
> Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> ["kensi"]
>
>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>
>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>
>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>
>
> That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
>

from the article;


"Alarmists mindlessly condemn atmospheric CO2 as "carbon pollution," but
carbon dioxide is essential to the health and grown of plant life.

NASA satellites show that over the past 35 years, there has been an
increase in world greenery equal in area to twice the continental United
States. Climate change has been a particular blessing in Africa, where
the "Sahel greening" has significantly reduced famine.

The effects of climate change range from the obvious (lower heating
bills) to the subtle (more habitat for moose and endangered sharks).
Territory formerly deemed too forbiddingly cold will grow more temperate
— and valuable. Delicacies from lobster to blueberries may become more
plentiful.

Bottom line? Global warming will bring gains as well as losses, upsides
no less than downsides. Climate science isn't a black-and-white morality
tale. Our climate discourse shouldn't be either."
benj
2018-04-09 21:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 2:36 PM, Sergio wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 1:19 PM, Sn!pe wrote:
>> Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ["kensi"]
>>
>>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>>
>>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>>
>>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>>
>>
>> That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
>>
>
> from the article;
>
>
> "Alarmists mindlessly condemn atmospheric CO2 as "carbon pollution," but
> carbon dioxide is essential to the health and grown of plant life.
>
> NASA satellites show that over the past 35 years, there has been an
> increase in world greenery equal in area to twice the continental United
> States. Climate change has been a particular blessing in Africa, where
> the "Sahel greening" has significantly reduced famine.
>
> The effects of climate change range from the obvious (lower heating
> bills) to the subtle (more habitat for moose and endangered sharks).
> Territory formerly deemed too forbiddingly cold will grow more temperate
> — and valuable. Delicacies from lobster to blueberries may become more
> plentiful.
>
> Bottom line? Global warming will bring gains as well as losses, upsides
> no less than downsides. Climate science isn't a black-and-white morality
> tale. Our climate discourse shouldn't be either."
>
Hey, Sergio, CO2 most definitely IS a pollutant. Yeah, we all know how
beneficial it plants and stuff, but that doesn't matter. What is and is
not a Pollutant is determined by EPA regulations. And they SPECIFICALLY
made CO2 a "pollutant". Why? Because the EPA may not regulate gasses
that are not pollutants. So they simply declared CO2 a pollutant so they
would have the authority to "regulate" it. This is truth.
Sergio
2018-04-09 21:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 4:34 PM, benj wrote:
> On 4/9/2018 2:36 PM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 4/9/2018 1:19 PM, Sn!pe wrote:
>>> Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ["kensi"]
>>>
>>>>      She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>>     Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>>>
>>>>     <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
>>>
>>
>> from the article;
>>
>>
>> "Alarmists mindlessly condemn atmospheric CO2 as "carbon pollution," but
>> carbon dioxide is essential to the health and grown of plant life.
>>
>> NASA satellites show that over the past 35 years, there has been an
>> increase in world greenery equal in area to twice the continental United
>> States. Climate change has been a particular blessing in Africa, where
>> the "Sahel greening" has significantly reduced famine.
>>
>> The effects of climate change range from the obvious (lower heating
>> bills) to the subtle (more habitat for moose and endangered sharks).
>> Territory formerly deemed too forbiddingly cold will grow more temperate
>> — and valuable. Delicacies from lobster to blueberries may become more
>> plentiful.
>>
>> Bottom line? Global warming will bring gains as well as losses, upsides
>> no less than downsides. Climate science isn't a black-and-white morality
>> tale. Our climate discourse shouldn't be either."
>>
> Hey, Sergio, CO2 most definitely IS a pollutant. Yeah, we all know how
> beneficial it plants and stuff, but that doesn't matter. What is and is
> not a Pollutant is determined by EPA regulations. And they SPECIFICALLY
> made CO2 a "pollutant". Why? Because the EPA may not regulate gasses
> that are not pollutants. So they simply declared CO2 a pollutant so they
> would have the authority to "regulate" it. This is truth.

That was crazy, and they did that without considering it is needed to
make plants grow. Obama was going to use it to shut down coal plants,
and Obama's EPA were cowboys/cowgirls, trying to impress short sighted
leftist. all marching in unison off the cliff, sig Obama, without
addressing nor understanding the real problems,
The Equalizer
2018-04-09 22:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sergio:


> That was crazy, and they did that without considering it is needed to
> make plants grow.

What is even more crazy than that?

Well, it is your assumption that plants depend on man made CO2!
So how has plant life evolved on this planet over the last 3 billion
years w/o the greedy hoards of multi billionaire corporate coal/oil
magnates and their brain washed (brain dead) climate change denialist
propaganda drones!

> Obama was going to use it to shut down coal plants,
> and Obama's EPA were cowboys/cowgirls, trying to impress short sighted
> leftist. all marching in unison off the cliff, sig Obama, without
> addressing nor understanding the real problems,

The real problems?

So you do reckon that CO2 emission is the only thing that happens during
burning fossil fuels? If so, than you know bugger all about human/animal
health and the effects of particle emissions and chemical pollution.

Oh, and BTW have you ever contemplated on the real value of our carbon/
hydrocarbon sources before your advocacy for burning that damned thing up
until there is nothing left to support manufacturing, specially in the
steal and chemical industries for future generations???

Conclusion:
Virulent rightardism has fucked up your brain real good! Go and suckle on
Trump's cock!
Checkmate
2018-04-10 00:39:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by
Checkmate! In article <pagr6u$q4f$***@dont-email.me>,
***@never.invalid.net says...


> Trump's cock!
>
Are you gay for Trump?

--
Checkmate ®
Author, Humorist, Cynic
Philosopher, Humanitarian
Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars
Copyright © 2018
all rights reserved

In loving memory of The Battle Kitten
May 2010-February 12, 2017

"There are many here among us,
who feel that life is but a joke."
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
2018-04-09 20:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:19:58 +0100, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:

>NOT Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>["kensi"]
>
>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>
>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>
>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>
>
>That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.

It's a pile of plagiarised jew shite. And gook Ejershito likes to
zsuck Jeff Kakobstein's fat jew rectum.

--

"You are full of shit. You'll never convince any of us real Jews that
there is no Jewish look. I know my people and I can see their
Jewishness. Susan is not a Jew. If you want to get down her panties
just ask her she'll let you. She's a non-Jew."
Message-ID: <bfbdb526-1042-4e8e-a39f-***@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>

"You can try all you want and get all the plastic surgery you want but
you'll never look like one of us because you are not a Jew. You are
an Irish Shiksa that Isn't even a righteous non-Jew a Ger Tzadeck You
are VEEDMUS amongst us and are a gentile. I would not be surprised if
you ever go to Eretz Israel and spout off your non-senseical lies that
a Jew doesn't kill you or a gentile murder you. You are wicked because
you antagonize and lie about the Tzadeckim. The best place for you is
scrubbing toilets and urinals in a gymnasium that is predominate used
by Negros."
Message-ID: <ee17d097-89f7-4e72-a41a-***@p2g2000prn.googlegroups.com>

- drug-fucked jew wannabe Y-chi Netfish, mocking neo-jew Suzy KKKohen's
attempted 'conversion' to the jew race

"Warren is not well. He's a non-Jewish mental patient who usually declines to
take his medications. Please keep this in mind when viewing future posts."
Message-ID: <JZQTk.1726$***@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>

- neo-jew 'convert' Suzy KKKohen, mocking drug-fucked jew wannabe Y-chi Netfish's
claim to be a jew
Sick old pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron (aka "Ron Jacobson")
2018-04-09 21:27:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>,
A shiteating cowardly nazoid sub-louse PEDO named Andrew "Andrzej"
Baron (aka "Ron Jacobson"/etc") wrote:

> It's a pile of plagiarised shite.

So EAT it, nazoid sub-louse... like Shitler did!

Yes folks, FOUR leading experts concluded: Shitler ate shit!

-------------------------------------------------------------

"He is an extreme masochist who derives sexual pleasure from
having a woman squat over him while she uriniates or defecates
on his face."


Quoted from

"A Psychological Analysis of Adolph Hitler"

Walter C. Langer, Harvard

With the collaboration of
Prof. Henry A. Murr, Harvard Psychological Clinic
Dr. Ernst Kris, New School for Social Research
Dr. Bertram D. Lawin, New York Psychoanalytic Institute

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/oss-profile-04-06.html

Some believe that he [Hitler] is entirely immune from such impulses.
Some believe that he is a chronic masturbator. Some believe that
he derives his sexual pleasure [Page 138] through voyeurism. Many
believe that he is completely impotent. Others, and these are perhaps
in the majority, that he is homosexual. It is probably true that he is
impotent but he is certainiy not homosexual in the ordinary sense of
the term. His perversion has quite a different nature which few have
guessed. He is an extreme masochist who derives sexual pleasure from
having a woman squat over him while she uriniates or defecates on his
face. (Strasser, 919; see also 931, 932)*

[*Note: There may be some people who would question the reliability of
any information given by Otto Strasser because of his reputation. It
is perhaps because of his reputation that he came by this information
which had been so carefully guarded. He also supplied the interviewer
with a great deal of other information concerning Hitler which
checked very closely with that of other informants. As far as this
study is concerned we have no reason to question his sincerity.]

Although this perversion is not a common one, it is not unknown in
clinical work, particularly in its incipient stages. The four
collaborators on this study, in addition to Dr. De Saussure who
learned of the perversion from other sources, have all had experience
with cases of this type. All five agree that their information as
given is probably true in view of their clinical experience and their
knowledge of Hitler's character. In the following section further
evidence of its validition will be cited. At the present moment it is
sufficient to recognize the influence that this perversion must have
on the conscious mental life of Hitler.
Michael Ejercito
2018-04-11 17:27:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
aliash)" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

>On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:19:58 +0100, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:

>>NOT Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>["kensi"]
>>
>>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>>
>>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>>
>>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>>
>>
>>That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.

>It's a pile of plagiarised jew shite. And gook Ejershito likes to
>zsuck Jeff Kakobstein's fat jew rectum.

You have no evidence of plagiarism.


Michael


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Ser Gregor Clegane
2018-04-10 15:25:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) mewed...
>Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>["kensi"]
>
>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>
>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>
>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>
>That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.

He gets zero thanks from Yours Truly. Why? Because he
posted a link and was too lazy and rude to summarize the
contents so those of us who *might* be interested at
least had an inkling whether or not it was worth logging
on.

Why do so many on Usenet act like commensalism is de
rigueur? The only benefit of Ejercito's post is to himself.
He apparently likes to hear himself talk but is less than
percipient.

--

The Mountain
Mr On!on
2018-04-10 15:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Ser Gregor Clegane <***@lannistermail.raven> wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) mewed...
> >Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >["kensi"]
> >
> >> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
> >>
> >> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
> >>
> >> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
> >
> >That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
>
> He gets zero thanks from Yours Truly. Why? Because he
> posted a link and was too lazy and rude to summarize the
> contents so those of us who *might* be interested at
> least had an inkling whether or not it was worth logging
> on.
>
> Why do so many on Usenet act like commensalism is de
> rigueur? The only benefit of Ejercito's post is to himself.
> He apparently likes to hear himself talk but is less than
> percipient.
>

<https://imgflip.com/i/283non>

--
\|/
(((Ï))) U+97F1

Wearing an On!on on his belt, which was the style at the time.
%
2018-04-10 15:50:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2018-04-10 8:48 AM, Mr On!on wrote:
> Ser Gregor Clegane <***@lannistermail.raven> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) mewed...
>>> Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ["kensi"]
>>>
>>>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
>>>
>>> That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
>>
>> He gets zero thanks from Yours Truly. Why? Because he
>> posted a link and was too lazy and rude to summarize the
>> contents so those of us who *might* be interested at
>> least had an inkling whether or not it was worth logging
>> on.
>>
>> Why do so many on Usenet act like commensalism is de
>> rigueur? The only benefit of Ejercito's post is to himself.
>> He apparently likes to hear himself talk but is less than
>> percipient.
>>
>
> <https://imgflip.com/i/283non>
>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ-4cKFVC34
Sn!pe
2018-04-10 15:58:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
% <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2018-04-10 8:48 AM, Mr On!on wrote:
> > Ser Gregor Clegane <***@lannistermail.raven> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, ***@gmail.com (Sn!pe) mewed...
> >>> Michael Ejercito <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ["kensi"]
> >>>
> >>>> She has no credibility on these newsgroups.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeff Jacoby has plenty of credibility.
> >>>>
> >>>> <http://www.jeffjacoby.com/20620/the-blessings-of-climate-change>
> >>>
> >>> That's an interesting, well-balanced article, thanks for the link.
> >>>
> >>
> >> He gets zero thanks from Yours Truly. Why? Because he
> >> posted a link and was too lazy and rude to summarize the
> >> contents so those of us who *might* be interested at
> >> least had an inkling whether or not it was worth logging
> >> on.
> >>
> >> Why do so many on Usenet act like commensalism is de
> >> rigueur? The only benefit of Ejercito's post is to himself.
> >> He apparently likes to hear himself talk but is less than
> >> percipient.
> >>
> >
> > <https://imgflip.com/i/283non>
> >
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ-4cKFVC34>
>

Right on, lol.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe <***@gmail.com>

My pet rock Gordon just is.
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> [ Trumpettes don't think for themselves ]

In some Turkish bazar, somewhere:

kensi: Disarm everyone.
Trump: Arm everyone.

kensi: Nationalize everything.
Trump: Privatize.

kensi: You're nuts.
Trump: Read "Art of the Deal".

kensi: Repent, the end is near.
Trump: Now you're talking, Padawan.
Trevor Wilson
2018-04-09 22:14:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/04/2018 12:52 AM, kensi wrote:
> On 4/8/2018 4:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>
> [snip most of epic SPNAKage of ko0ky benj]
>
> Keep up the good work!
>
>> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with
>> attempting to establish what you actually believe.
>
> There's no such thing as "what benj actually believes". High-RWA types
> like him outsource ontological queries to the likes of Fox News and
> Breitbart, rather than build their own in-house ontologies and query
> those. He quite literally does not *have* a worldview. Nor does Trump,
> nor do the lot of them. It's part of what makes them such kOoks.
>
> Instead they have external "fonts of truth(iness)" on speed-dial, with
> maybe some internal caching. But this caching isn't a true self-managed
> ontology, because they do no gardening of it, as is apparent when (as
> always) it ends up being a mass of contradictions and
> empirically-invalidated nonsense (such as climate change denial).
>
> See:
> https://theauthoritarians.org/donald-trump-and-authoritarian-followers/
>
> "They are highly dogmatic. Because /they have mainly gotten their
> beliefs from the authorities in their lives, rather than think things
> out for themselves/, they have no real defense when facts or events
> indicate they are wrong. So they just dig in their heels and refuse to
> change."
>
> (emphasis added)
>

**That answers a lot of questions.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
benj
2018-04-10 08:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 4/9/2018 6:14 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 12:52 AM, kensi wrote:
>> On 4/8/2018 4:17 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote:
>>
>> [snip most of epic SPNAKage of ko0ky benj]
>>
>> Keep up the good work!
>>
>>> **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with
>>> attempting to establish what you actually believe.
>>
>> There's no such thing as "what benj actually believes". High-RWA types
>> like him outsource ontological queries to the likes of Fox News and
>> Breitbart, rather than build their own in-house ontologies and query
>> those. He quite literally does not *have* a worldview. Nor does Trump,
>> nor do the lot of them. It's part of what makes them such kOoks.
>>
>> Instead they have external "fonts of truth(iness)" on speed-dial, with
>> maybe some internal caching. But this caching isn't a true
>> self-managed ontology, because they do no gardening of it, as is
>> apparent when (as always) it ends up being a mass of contradictions
>> and empirically-invalidated nonsense (such as climate change denial).
>>
>> See:
>> https://theauthoritarians.org/donald-trump-and-authoritarian-followers/
>>
>> "They are highly dogmatic. Because /they have mainly gotten their
>> beliefs from the authorities in their lives, rather than think things
>> out for themselves/, they have no real defense when facts or events
>> indicate they are wrong. So they just dig in their heels and refuse to
>> change."
>>
>> (emphasis added)
>>
>
> **That answers a lot of questions.
>
Pro propagandists Trevor and "kensi" stroke and support each other.
Propaganda 101.
max headroom
2018-04-07 14:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In news:paakrs$1fn6$***@gioia.aioe.org,
kensi <***@gmail.nospam.invalid> typed:

> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that
> the company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would
> be. ... The report, titled "The Greenhouse Effect," said the effects
> of climate change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early
> 21st:

> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/

<yawn>
James McGinn
2018-04-08 05:41:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:33:37 AM UTC-7, kensi wrote:
> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
> company knew

This is a retarded claim. Even now global warming is just a strained conjecture. How did somebody know then what we are only guessing at now.

Global warming groupies are the dumbest of the dumbl
James McGinn
2018-04-11 17:46:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:33:37 AM UTC-7, kensi wrote:
> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows that the
> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would be. ...
> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of climate
> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st:
>
> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/
>
> --
> "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
> the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
> "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
> in here." ~Checkmate

What impact? Only envirowhackos claim to see any impact.
Loading...