Are there really 129 "Guests online" right now?
| Are there really 129 "Guests online" right now?20-04-2024 20:52 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1769) |
For a dead website where only a handful of members actually post anything, this site gets a whole lot of attention, apparently. Supposedly, there are 129 "Guests online" right now. What are they doing? Do they just stare at a list of thread titles? They don't even open up any threads, or they would at least show up as "views". But it does seem to be fooling somebody, because search engines show climate debate as if it were a popular discussion site. |
| RE: and NOW is is 166 "Guests online"20-04-2024 20:54 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1769) |
sealover wrote: Now it has jumped to 166 "Guests online". Maybe they really are following intently, and more came online in response to the post about it. But what are they actually DOING? |
| RE: 150 online guests still watching..20-04-2024 21:00 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1769) |
sealover wrote:sealover wrote: They come and go pretty fast, I guess. 150 online right now. HEY, YOU GUYS! WHAT ARE YOU DOING AS ONLINE GUESTS AT THIS WEBSITE? How do we even know you are real if you never say anything or open threads? |
| 20-04-2024 22:29 | |
Swan ★★★★★(5892) |
sealover wrote:sealover wrote:sealover wrote: My page says that there are 9 guest online now, probably all the same schizzo IBdaMann claims that Gold is a molecule, and that the last ice age never happened because I was not there to see it. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that IBdaMann is clearly not using enough LSD. According to CDC/Government info, people who were vaccinated are now DYING at a higher rate than non-vaccinated people, which exposes the covid vaccines as the poison that they are, this is now fully confirmed by the terrorist CDC This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND. ULTRA MAGA "Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat." MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA So why is helping to hide the murder of an American president patriotic?  Sonia makes me so proud to be a dumb white boy  Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL |
| RE: 38 "views" after a few hours21-04-2024 02:10 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1769) |
Swan wrote:sealover wrote:sealover wrote:sealover wrote: For about ten minutes after this thread became visible on the list of thread titles, there were supposedly about 150 "Guests online". Now, hours later, there have been a total of 38 "views", indicating that someone actually opened up the thread to view it. That is plausible just from the tiny number of active posters. A handful of the "Online guests" are real human beings, schizzo or not. The other hundred or more who suddenly appear and disappear are Branner's con. |
| 21-04-2024 23:54 | |
| Swan★★★★★ (5892) |
sealover wrote:Swan wrote:sealover wrote:sealover wrote:sealover wrote: Or the NSA is farting around Again IBdaMann claims that Gold is a molecule, and that the last ice age never happened because I was not there to see it. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that IBdaMann is clearly not using enough LSD. According to CDC/Government info, people who were vaccinated are now DYING at a higher rate than non-vaccinated people, which exposes the covid vaccines as the poison that they are, this is now fully confirmed by the terrorist CDC This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND. ULTRA MAGA "Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat." MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA So why is helping to hide the murder of an American president patriotic? Sonia makes me so proud to be a dumb white boy Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL |
| RE: 186 guests on line.... I doubt it.17-05-2024 02:06 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
According to the little box on the left, there are 186 "Guests online" right now. I doubt it. But many new viewers, actual human beings, visit this site for the first time on any given day. They might immediately see it as a "dead" website, where nearly all the "Last Post"s on all the most recently active threads are by the same poster. But I keep hoping at least some of them will see past that and discover a pleasant surprise upon closer examination. I can dream, can't I? PhD biogeochemist with interesting stories to tell... You don't even have to join to see them, and they compiled to remove all the troll noise. See "Biogeochemistry-related Thread Guide..." thread to know what they are about and precisely which pages they are all compiled on. ------------------------------------ For a dead website where only a handful of members actually post anything, this site gets a whole lot of attention, apparently. Supposedly, there are 129 "Guests online" right now. What are they doing? Do they just stare at a list of thread titles? They don't even open up any threads, or they would at least show up as "views". But it does seem to be fooling somebody, because search engines show climate debate as if it were a popular discussion site. |
| 17-05-2024 03:08 | |
Into the Night ★★★★★(22614) |
Im a BM wrote: There is no such thing a 'biogeochemistry'. Buzzword fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 17-05-2024 19:30 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
"There is no such thing as 'biogeochemistry'. Buzzword fallacy." - Into the Night The proclamation that "there is no such thing as biogeochemistry" has been made in more than a hundred different posts. ("Repetition fallacy") It appears to be a Royal Decree. Or perhaps there is a scientific basis for the proclamation. Maybe it would violate the 1st law of thermodynamics if biogeochemistry were a real word that had a widely accepted definition. There is only one person in the world who understands thermodynamics well enough to know if that is the case. Actually, "biogeochemistry" IS a real word that has a widely accepted definition. See the "What is biogeochemistry" thread for a reality check. And scroll past all the red parrot picture posts, unless you are interested in knowing what all the Royal Decrees are regarding buzzwords, fallacies, and violations of the 1st law of thermodynamics. Into the Night wrote:Im a BM wrote: |
| 17-05-2024 21:52 | |
| keepit★★★★★ (3330) |
itn, Biogeochemistry isn't a buzzword or a fallacy. It just seems like it to you. I think that's because you live in a smaller world than im a bm. |
| 17-05-2024 23:25 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Im a BM wrote: Inversion fallacy. Fallacy fallacy. Buzzword fallacy. Im a BM wrote: You deny science. Im a BM wrote: Buzzword fallacy. Belittlement fallacy. Argument of the Stone fallacy. Im a BM wrote: You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Buzzword fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Stop spamming. Im a BM wrote: Argument of the Stone fallacy. Bulverism. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 17-05-2024 23:26 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
keepit wrote: Buzzsword fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 18-05-2024 01:10 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
Into the Night wrote:keepit wrote: YOU are a "Buzzsword fallacy". Or maybe just an Ignoramus phallusy. Unambiguous definition of "Ignoramus phallusy" = Ignorant dick. Would you experience difficult withdrawal symptoms if you went a whole day without trolling or spamming? No? PLEASE PROVE IT! Will it ever be possible for someone to open up this website without seeing that nearly every "Last Post" was by Into the Night? |
| 18-05-2024 04:03 | |
| keepit★★★★★ (3330) |
Just for general edification -- Just because someone or a group of people can't calculate an average (for whatever reason) doesn't mean there isn't such an average. THERE IS. It's out there somewhere, even if it's uncalculated. |
| 18-05-2024 05:17 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
keepit wrote: Absolutely true, keepit. One of the key "arguments" has been that "It is not possible to measure the earth's average (temperature, atmospheric concentration of CO2, sea water alkalinity, whatever variable needs to be disputed)." It may be difficult to say with the highest accuracy and precision what the average actually is. But you can sure get into the right ball park and make meaningful comparisons. But if you think getting an accurate average percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is potentially dubious, imagine trying to get an accurate average percentage of the US population with a particular viewpoint based on the response of barely a thousand of them who were willing to be polled. Nonetheless, it can sure get you into the right ballpark and make meaningful comparisons. The most meaningful comparisons are between identical polls taken in an identical manner, done over multiple years, multiple times. The "tipping point" came in just the last few years with so much extreme weather. You don't have to calculate an exact average of past weather to say with certainty that the new stuff is DIFFERENT than before. Only a small minority still cling to the belief that it is all a hoax. |
| 18-05-2024 08:49 | |
IBdaMann ★★★★★(14885) |
keepit wrote: Just for general edification -- Just because someone or a group of people can't calculate an average (for whatever reason) doesn't mean there isn't such an average. THERE IS. It's out there somewhere, even if it's uncalculated. Yes. Thank you for participating, keepit. Here's another one: "You are reading this right now." |
| 18-05-2024 09:12 | |
| IBdaMann★★★★★ (14885) |
Im a BM wrote: One of the key "arguments" has been that "It is not possible to measure the earth's average (temperature, atmospheric concentration of CO2, sea water alkalinity, whatever variable needs to be disputed)." It's not an argument. It's statistical math. It is not possible to calculate such averages/quantities to within any usable accuracy. Nobody has to argue this; there are only mathematical incompetents who deny it. Guess who is about to advertise that he is mathematically incompetent. Im a BM wrote: It may be difficult to say with the highest accuracy and precision what the average actually is. But you can sure get into the right ball park and make meaningful comparisons. False. Shall we rake you over the coals again? Yes, we shall. Just for the laughter and merriment of others, please explain what you consider "the right ballpark" and how you would go about calculating the average to within this "ballpark." I'm heating up the coals right now. Im a BM wrote: The "tipping point" came in just the last few years with so much extreme weather. There hasn't been any extreme weather in the last thirty years. All weather during that time has happened before and has been documented, i.e. nothing out of the ordinary. Were there any lead-melting temperatures that I missed? That would be extreme. What about 900-mph winds, or double digit Kelvin temperatures? Either of those would be extreme, I'll give you that. Any of those? Im a BM wrote:You don't have to calculate an exact average of past weather to say with certainty that the new stuff is DIFFERENT than before. Yes, you have to know the exact former and latter conditions, along with a subtraction operation, to know what difference, if any, there is. Im a BM wrote: Only a small minority still cling to the belief that it is all a hoax. ... because you believe that reality is determined by consensus opinion, and that you get to declare the consensus opinion, which happens to be your opinion, because you would otherwise have to be resigned to knowing that your opinion is absurd and that your view represents the science-denying, math-avoiding lunatic fringe. |
| 18-05-2024 09:14 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Im a BM wrote:Into the Night wrote:keepit wrote: YOU are a "Buzzsword fallacy".[/quote] Inversion fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Inversion fallacy. You cannot project YOUR problems on anybody else, Sock. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 18-05-2024 09:14 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
keepit wrote: Void argument fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 18-05-2024 09:18 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Im a BM wrote:keepit wrote: Void argument fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Denying mathematics is YOUR problem. You cannot project YOUR problem on anybody else. Im a BM wrote: Void argument fallacy. Im a BM wrote: There is no such thing as a 'tipping point'. Buzzword fallacy. What 'extreme weather'? Im a BM wrote: Base rate fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Omniscience fallacy. You don't get to speak for everyone. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 19-05-2024 04:21 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
Are there really 98 "Guests online" right now, as the box on the left indicates? Very unlikely. However, search engines display this website among results, as if were more than a troll-infested rabbit hole of a dead site. And new viewers are directed here, in the hope of finding some kind of valid, meaningful discussion of climate change. Oh, my goodness! Now there are 138 "Online guests" Maybe one of them will realize that they don't have to give the trolls any attention in order to learn something from or contribute something to the discussion. And now we're up to 157 "Guests online". This site must be more popular than it looks from here. And now it's up to 174. How many minutes before its back down to 5? Oh, wow! Now it's up to 189. Things move fast around here. So fast that it just hit 203 "Online guests". Such a wild and crazy place! Into the Night wrote:Im a BM wrote:keepit wrote: |
| 19-05-2024 04:24 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Stop whining. |
| 19-05-2024 08:11 | |
| IBdaMann★★★★★ (14885) |
Im a BM wrote: Are there really 98 "Guests online" right now, as the box on the left indicates? Of course. Everytime you become active, the internet rushes to discover your library. Im a BM wrote: However, search engines display this website among results, as if were more than a troll-infested rabbit hole of a dead site. This site has a monopoly on magrove solutions to dwindling ocean alkalinity. Im a BM wrote: And new viewers are directed here, in the hope of finding some kind of valid, meaningful discussion of climate change. The search engine uses teasers, implying that perusers of this site will learn the secret of what you testified in court. Im a BM wrote: Now there are 138 "Online guests" Rumors of dead Dominican coral reefs has that effect. Im a BM wrote: Maybe one of them will realize that they don't have to give the trolls any attention in order to learn something from or contribute something to the discussion. Maybe one of them will realize that he is a singular and not a plural. Im a BM wrote: And now we're up to 157 "Guests online". They all probably figured that they could get a glimpse of my posts. Im a BM wrote: This site must be more popular than it looks from here. This site must be the best site on the internet. |
| 19-05-2024 17:38 | |
| keepit★★★★★ (3330) |
ibm and itn, There is a "very much larger scenario" than you live in. As a result of your attitudes most of the things you say on this website are just wrong. |
| 19-05-2024 19:47 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
keepit wrote: Argument of the Stone fallacy. Continuing to deny science and mathematics the way you do doesn't change either science or mathematics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 19-05-2024 19:53 | |
| keepit★★★★★ (3330) |
itn, Your mentality lacks any dynamic nature and sounds like a cult mentality which is something that i've dealt with in the past and made no headway. |
| 19-05-2024 21:33 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
keepit wrote: Science is not a cult. Mathematics is not a cult. You just want to ignore them in favor of your religion. You cannot project YOUR problems on me or anybody else, keepit. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 19-05-2024 21:34 |
| 19-05-2024 21:49 | |
| keepit★★★★★ (3330) |
itn, Noone is saying science or math is a cult. You're just arguing with your own "filaments". |
| 19-05-2024 22:51 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
keepit wrote: You cannot deny your own posts, keepit. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 22-05-2024 20:35 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
Little box on the left says 1 "Users online" and 4 "Guests online". That is quite plausible. Soon enough, probably within the next half hour, it will suddenly show a jump to 50-200 "Guests online" That is quite implausible. Of the 4 "Guests online" right now, it is plausible that ONE of them has never seen this website before. Or at least within the next half hour, it is plausible that ONE or even more of the "Guests online" is someone who never saw this website before. It would be hard for them to see anything that resembles "What is climate-debate.com" as described on the home page. Any thread they open up will go straight to the "Last Post". Which is usually a hostile attack by one of the trolls. ------------------------------------------- According to the little box on the left, there are 186 "Guests online" right now. I doubt it. But many new viewers, actual human beings, visit this site for the first time on any given day. They might immediately see it as a "dead" website, where nearly all the "Last Post"s on all the most recently active threads are by the same poster. But I keep hoping at least some of them will see past that and discover a pleasant surprise upon closer examination. I can dream, can't I? PhD biogeochemist with interesting stories to tell... You don't even have to join to see them, and they compiled to remove all the troll noise. See "Biogeochemistry-related Thread Guide..." thread to know what they are about and precisely which pages they are all compiled on. ------------------------------------ For a dead website where only a handful of members actually post anything, this site gets a whole lot of attention, apparently. Supposedly, there are 129 "Guests online" right now. What are they doing? Do they just stare at a list of thread titles? They don't even open up any threads, or they would at least show up as "views". But it does seem to be fooling somebody, because search engines show climate debate as if it were a popular discussion site. |
| 23-05-2024 03:08 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Stop whining. |
| 03-09-2024 18:40 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
sealover wrote: When I logged a minute ago, it said that there were 176 "Guests online". But the last thread I posted on (yesterday) was the ONLY thread that had any activity for about a week. Branner does visit his website now and then. It is not at all clear what he does when he is here. What he does NOT do is act in any way as a moderator. I have to assume that he doesn't even look at any of the posts. Someday I might figure out what he gets out of it, by somehow getting the site to pretend there are... 161 "Guests online" right now. In a few minutes it will suddenly drop back down to less than 5 "Guests online". |
| 04-09-2024 19:00 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Stop whining. |
| 12-09-2024 23:15 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
Into the Night wrote: I would say, "Stop spamming", but I am not sure we even speak the same language. When I say "alkaline", I use it as an adjective, and I believe I use it as an adjective with the same meaning all the other scientists have for it. When you say "alkaline" it somehow becomes a NOUN, and I still don't understand what it could possibly mean as a noun. I think I understand the definition of "spam" in a manner similar to most others. I think it works as noun AND as a VERB. But for all I know, when you say "spam", it becomes an ADJECTIVE. |
| 13-09-2024 02:58 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Im a BM wrote:Into the Night wrote: Go learn English. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 13-10-2024 20:21 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1769) |
212 "Guests online" RIGHT NOW! Yet, I appear to be the only user online. When it suddenly drops back down to less than a dozen "Guests online", I'll take a peek at klimadebat.dk to see if all the phantom visitors went THERE next. However, I notice the search engines don't seem to be fooled any more. A Google search for "climate discussion websites" or "climate forums", etc., no longer displays climate-debate.com in the page one selection. Maybe THAT is why virtually no new members have joined in months. This greatly diminishes the value of posting for the potential new member who wishes to have a rational discussion about climate change. Sigh... I wonder what those... 212 (still) "Guests online" are doing. Whatever it is, they will suddenly all leave at once pretty soon. And there will be no additional "views" on any of the active threads. ---------------------------------------------------------------- For a dead website where only a handful of members actually post anything, this site gets a whole lot of attention, apparently. Supposedly, there are 129 "Guests online" right now. What are they doing? Do they just stare at a list of thread titles? They don't even open up any threads, or they would at least show up as "views". But it does seem to be fooling somebody, because search engines show climate debate as if it were a popular discussion site.[/quote] |
| 13-10-2024 20:25 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
sealover wrote: Whining does nothing, Robert. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 15-10-2024 07:22 | |
| Im a BM★★★★☆ (1270) |
Into the Night wrote:sealover wrote: No argument. Incoherent buzzwords. Jealousy fallacy. |
| 16-10-2024 01:07 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (22614) |
Im a BM wrote:Into the Night wrote:sealover wrote: LIF. Grow up. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
Join the debate Are there really 129 "Guests online" right now?:
Related content
| Threads | Replies | Last post |
| Dumb Mexican woman (redundant) falls in love online and travels to Peru to have her organs cut out by | 14 | 25-11-2024 21:55 |
| Online voting | 18 | 30-03-2023 21:41 |
| Retarded mom wakes up and stops posting vids of her little girl online | 1 | 27-07-2022 15:18 |
| The Most Powerful Individual Evolution Opportunity & Special Online Secret Society Opening | 1 | 22-09-2021 05:27 |
| The Ultimate Savior Is Online, Going To Reveal The Truth Of Life Society Civilization | 1 | 06-07-2021 08:45 |