Remember me
▼ Content

Greenhouse Gases Are Real



Page 4 of 4<<<234
14-09-2017 19:07
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.
14-09-2017 20:23
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?
14-09-2017 20:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


Heh. Guess you need to watch more Saturday morning cartoon shows with your kid. It's part of the Transformer series.

I think your kid is right!


The Parrot Killer
14-09-2017 20:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?


I doubt it was because the kid knows physics much. Kids are pretty good at detecting double-talk though.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 00:06
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?


I doubt it was because the kid knows physics much. Kids are pretty good at detecting double-talk though.


This is RICH ! Now you and Wake both are relying on a 5 y.o. to make the 2 of you seem credible. What's wrong, can't find any adults ?

@GreenMan, notice all they have is "childish" word play ? They don't believe that atmospheric gases have angular momentum/spin. http://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.467047 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4608/13/6/015
Who knows, maybe the 5 y.o. was saying Wake was a decepticon ?

@Wake and ITN, there is also this if either of you care to discuss science; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/96JD03264/abstract/

Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both

Edited on 15-09-2017 00:15
15-09-2017 00:46
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote: Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


When are you going to actually perform this "experiment" instead of saying you have one? I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is.
15-09-2017 00:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?


I doubt it was because the kid knows physics much. Kids are pretty good at detecting double-talk though.


This is RICH ! Now you and Wake both are relying on a 5 y.o. to make the 2 of you seem credible. What's wrong, can't find any adults ?

@GreenMan, notice all they have is "childish" word play ? They don't believe that atmospheric gases have angular momentum/spin. http://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.467047 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4608/13/6/015
Who knows, maybe the 5 y.o. was saying Wake was a decepticon ?

@Wake and ITN, there is also this if either of you care to discuss science; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/96JD03264/abstract/

Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


Angular momentum is in every molecule and in every atom. It is not used to determine temperature or for describing heat.

You obviously haven't heard a little call your bullshit (and properly too) for telling him there are no monsters under the bed.

The kid knows it's a fallacious statement, even though he can't name what the fallacy is or even pronounce the word 'fallacy'.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 01:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote: Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


When are you going to actually perform this "experiment" instead of saying you have one? I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is.


Probably never. He would rather just talk about it. He expects others to perform the experiment for him so he doesn't have to pay for it out of his own pocket.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 01:06
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?


I doubt it was because the kid knows physics much. Kids are pretty good at detecting double-talk though.


This is RICH ! Now you and Wake both are relying on a 5 y.o. to make the 2 of you seem credible. What's wrong, can't find any adults ?

@GreenMan, notice all they have is "childish" word play ? They don't believe that atmospheric gases have angular momentum/spin. http://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.467047 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4608/13/6/015
Who knows, maybe the 5 y.o. was saying Wake was a decepticon ?

@Wake and ITN, there is also this if either of you care to discuss science; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/96JD03264/abstract/

Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


Angular momentum is in every molecule and in every atom. It is not used to determine temperature or for describing heat.

You obviously haven't heard a little call your bullshit (and properly too) for telling him there are no monsters under the bed.

The kid knows it's a fallacious statement, even though he can't name what the fallacy is or even pronounce the word 'fallacy'.


He is 5 years old. He hasn't a clue what James is talking about - only how he is saying it. But then James hasn't a clue what he's talking about. He finds it peculiar that the closer the the surface of the Earth the warmer the atmosphere becomes.
15-09-2017 03:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So now you compound your lie with ANOTHER lie by denying it???


When you have nothing else to offer I suppose you don't have any other way to counter BS save by multiplying on a lie.


Nah, you 2 have it wrong. I find you guys entertaining. It seems that neither one of you are capable of discussing why the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and the Boltzmann constant applies to 2 different things. It does matter but as I said, you 2 can't discuss it because neither one of you understand why that specific work was done and for what purpose. I think as far as climate change goes it might help but do need to keep things simple for you Wake and ITN.


Funny event: my five year old step grandson looking over my shoulder and reading your posting said that you were a "decepticon". I don't know what that is but if a 5 year old can see there's something wrong with you, you better get your act straight.


That's rich !!! LMAOROFL

I know what it is ! I post with you. Or is that a new low for you ? You have to agree with me because I claim that my 5 y.o. step-grandson knows physics.
Any chance he calls you Wile E. Coyote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ieb1Y1VCY ?


I doubt it was because the kid knows physics much. Kids are pretty good at detecting double-talk though.


This is RICH ! Now you and Wake both are relying on a 5 y.o. to make the 2 of you seem credible. What's wrong, can't find any adults ?

@GreenMan, notice all they have is "childish" word play ? They don't believe that atmospheric gases have angular momentum/spin. http://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.467047 http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4608/13/6/015
Who knows, maybe the 5 y.o. was saying Wake was a decepticon ?

@Wake and ITN, there is also this if either of you care to discuss science; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/96JD03264/abstract/

Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


Angular momentum is in every molecule and in every atom. It is not used to determine temperature or for describing heat.

You obviously haven't heard a little call your bullshit (and properly too) for telling him there are no monsters under the bed.

The kid knows it's a fallacious statement, even though he can't name what the fallacy is or even pronounce the word 'fallacy'.


He is 5 years old. He hasn't a clue what James is talking about - only how he is saying it. But then James hasn't a clue what he's talking about. He finds it peculiar that the closer the the surface of the Earth the warmer the atmosphere becomes.


This is what I mean. Kids are good at catching certain kinds of fallacies very early. He doesn't have to have a clue what James is talking about to see certain fallacies in it.

The kid can't name the fallacy, or even understand what the fallacy itself even is, but he knows there is something wrong. Thus, you get the 'decepticon' comment.

He may find it peculiar to see warmer temperatures near the surface, and that's fine for his world. He will later discover there are exceptions to that rule, if he decides to study the structure of the atmosphere more. He will discover the stratosphere, for instance, where temperature rises as you gain altitude.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 17:29
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote: Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


When are you going to actually perform this "experiment" instead of saying you have one? I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is.


Wake,
I'll do it when I am ready to. As to your comment >> I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is. <<, it hasn't changed. If I did it for you then I'd be wasting my time and effort.
15-09-2017 17:35
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:

This is what I mean. Kids are good at catching certain kinds of fallacies very early. He doesn't have to have a clue what James is talking about to see certain fallacies in it.



Seriously ? You expect people to consider your opinion credible when you're using a 5 y.o. kid as someone who understands science ? I think Wake showed what an idiot he is by bringing his step-grandson into this discussion. You 2 can't even be compared to Laurel and Hardy favorably any more. It's sad when your credibility rests on the 2 of you saying we're hiding behind a child.
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used. @All, would you let other people use your son if you have one like this ?
15-09-2017 18:02
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote: Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


When are you going to actually perform this "experiment" instead of saying you have one? I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is.


Wake,
I'll do it when I am ready to. As to your comment >> I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is. <<, it hasn't changed. If I did it for you then I'd be wasting my time and effort.


You don't have to do diddly squat for me. You're what - 56? You've been on this group for six months telling us your grandiose plans to solve the riddle of life, the universe and everything. And we haven't seen anything yet.

Instead a person of your age is telling me I'm bullying him! Are you perhaps retarded?
15-09-2017 20:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

This is what I mean. Kids are good at catching certain kinds of fallacies very early. He doesn't have to have a clue what James is talking about to see certain fallacies in it.



Seriously ? You expect people to consider your opinion credible when you're using a 5 y.o. kid as someone who understands science ?

I'm not using a 5 year old kid as someone who understands science. Read my post again.
James_ wrote:
I think Wake showed what an idiot he is by bringing his step-grandson into this discussion.

Not really.
James_ wrote:
You 2 can't even be compared to Laurel and Hardy favorably any more. It's sad when your credibility rests on the 2 of you saying we're hiding behind a child.

No one is hiding behind a child.
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.
James_ wrote:
@All, would you let other people use your son if you have one like this ?

You seem to have big comprehension problems while reading. You need to work on that.

It's probably why you tend to connect things together using buzzwords when those things have nothing to do with each other.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 20:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote: Yep, I think my experiment will work because Angular Momentum is a component of energy associated with both atmospheric gases and our atmosphere. I think I'll just enjoy the humor that you both help to bring to this forum. Thank You, Thank You both


When are you going to actually perform this "experiment" instead of saying you have one? I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is.


Wake,
I'll do it when I am ready to. As to your comment >> I also notice that each time it comes up you have another idea of what it is. <<, it hasn't changed. If I did it for you then I'd be wasting my time and effort.


You don't have to do diddly squat for me. You're what - 56? You've been on this group for six months telling us your grandiose plans to solve the riddle of life, the universe and everything. And we haven't seen anything yet.

Instead a person of your age is telling me I'm bullying him! Are you perhaps retarded?


He possibly might be, but not likely. He does seem to have a very low level of reading comprehension though.


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2017 21:31
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]James_ wrote: You 2 can't even be compared to Laurel and Hardy favorably any more.

They were compared to Laurel & Hardy, but NEVER favorably.
15-09-2017 22:24
L8112
★☆☆☆☆
(106)
the replies on here
....so much ignorance in one place. Well such is an internet forum :/
Edited on 15-09-2017 22:28
15-09-2017 22:37
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
L8112 wrote:
the replies on here
....so much ignorance in one place. Well such is an internet forum :/


Quite true.

Too bad you're one of the ignorant.

You have yet to show me any science, any math, any understanding of formal logic, any understanding of philosophy. All you do is quote your scripture.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 15-09-2017 22:39
16-09-2017 00:40
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
L8112 wrote:
the replies on here
....so much ignorance in one place. Well such is an internet forum :/


Then you should be capable of correcting the ignorance. We're waiting.
16-09-2017 00:40
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
L8112 wrote:
the replies on here
....so much ignorance in one place. Well such is an internet forum :/


Then you should be capable of correcting the ignorance. We're waiting.
16-09-2017 04:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
L8112 wrote:
the replies on here
....so much ignorance in one place. Well such is an internet forum :/


Then you should be capable of correcting the ignorance. We're waiting.


I can't force you to learn. YOU have to do that. I can tell where to study though.

First, since you like to quote random numbers so much, is to learn statistical math.

To do that you must learn probability math.

To do that you must learn random number math, or at least accept their properties as a given.

You should also realize that although math itself has the power of prediction, it loses that power in probability and statistical math, due to the use of random number math.

Secondly, you should learn what an authoritative reference is and how it differs from the crap you find on the internet. You should place very high levels of standards on data. You can learn this by studying the first two articles in the Data Mine thread. There I declare my standards and why I use them.

Thirdly, you should study at least enough philosophy to learn the meaning of science, what it is, and why it is defined the way it is. I recommend studying the areas of phenomenology, the philosophies of Karl Popper, and the definition and meaning of what a falsifiable theory is. In this way you will understand that science is just a set of falsifiable theories that describe nature, and what that simple definition really means.

Fourthly, you should study meteorology, the structure of the atmosphere, and the properties of certain common materials such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, water vapor and liquid water, and dry air as a composite. For these, look into the specific heat index of heat of these materials, and the heat conductivity of these materials.

Fifth, learn the laws of thermodynamics. The come from the theories themselves. Learn who created these theories and how they did it, and their reasoning behind them. Learn how each of these theories was falsifiable, and was tested against the null hypothesis. Along with that, learn the definitions and terminology of things like 'heat', 'thermal energy', and 'entropy'; that come from these theories. Learn as much of the history of science that you can. Learn about Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, and Tycho Brae, and others as people, not just names in a textbook. Learn why they reasoned the way they did, and how it fits with Karl Popper's philosophies.

Sixth, learn formal logic. Learn why it is a closed system, like mathematics, complete with formal proofs and the power of prediction inherent in such a closed system. Learn why science is an open system, and has no power of prediction on it's own. Learn why it must turn to a closed system to gain that power (called the formalization of a theory).

Seventh, learn about governments, including governmental structure. Learn why the United States is founded as a federated republic, and not a democracy. Learn what the limits of the federal government are and how they are specified. To learn that, you must learn the Constitution of the United States. That means to actually read it...all of it. Try to imagine yourself as a bunch of people who just got through fighting a war against an overbearing government when they wrote this document. Learn why it is just as true today. Then you will see why establishing a state religion such as the Church of Global Warming is unconstitutional. If you can, learn as much of the history of Western Civilization that you can, specifically the ancient Greek, Roman (before the emperors), and Israeli cultures. These three cultures form the three pillars that our nation is founded upon.

Eighth, learn what a religion is...how all religions are based on some initial circular argument. Learn why the circular argument is not necessarily a fallacy in itself, but it is if you don't recognize it. Learn why the other word for the circular argument is 'faith'. if you can, study as many religions as possible to see this pattern.

There is a LOT to learn. Some of this stuff will take years to learn. First, you must allow yourself to see beyond the Church of Global Warming, stop using the news as anything authoritative, stop using the internet as if it were the Oracle of Truth, and open your mind to learning. Remember, the Church of Global Warming, like many religions, will try to close your mind to learning and to return to chanting your scripture.

It can be done, but first it takes effort to learn. YOUR effort.


The Parrot Killer
16-09-2017 06:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
That last message is primarily directed at L8112 and Greenman, BTW.
16-09-2017 06:05
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: First Secondly Third Fourthly Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth First....

None of the numbers were needed for "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" to become an..... old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner.
16-09-2017 20:53
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
16-09-2017 22:09
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.


Missed that. Thanks.

I doubt they would be particularly livid. There really is nothing to be livid about.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 16-09-2017 22:09
16-09-2017 22:37
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.


And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.
16-09-2017 23:36
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.
16-09-2017 23:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 16-09-2017 23:48
17-09-2017 04:27
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.
17-09-2017 17:10
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.


And you have taken several entries trying to manufacture an excuse that he isn't credible. Now why do you suppose that is?
17-09-2017 19:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.

Inversion fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
17-09-2017 19:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.


And you have taken several entries trying to manufacture an excuse that he isn't credible. Now why do you suppose that is?

Personally, because I believe he is paranoid.

You see already how many things are taken by him as if someone were out to get him, or that someone is 'angry' when they aren't, or that a 5 year old can actually threaten him.


The Parrot Killer
17-09-2017 20:22
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.


And you have taken several entries trying to manufacture an excuse that he isn't credible. Now why do you suppose that is?

Personally, because I believe he is paranoid.

You see already how many things are taken by him as if someone were out to get him, or that someone is 'angry' when they aren't, or that a 5 year old can actually threaten him.


ITN,
I think it's funny that both you and Wake are attacking me personally. Not whether what I say is accurate or not but you are attacking me as a person. I think that's because neither one of you know enough to discredit what I say.
And as you both claim, wake's son or is it his step-grandson ? whose opinion you both consider credible because he considers me a con artist ? That's an example on how to slander someone while not having the balls to take responsibility for your own ignorant opinions IMHO.
17-09-2017 20:45
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
I think it's funny that both you and Wake are attacking me personally. Not whether what I say is accurate or not but you are attacking me as a person. I think that's because neither one of you know enough to discredit what I say.
And as you both claim, wake's son or is it his step-grandson ? whose opinion you both consider credible because he considers me a con artist ? That's an example on how to slander someone while not having the balls to take responsibility for your own ignorant opinions IMHO.


And I think that you have ceases to provide any scientific ideas, theories or information because in every case you have had incorrect understanding of them.

The only reason you have been personally attacked is in return for your own attacks because you don't like having your ideas proven incorrect.
17-09-2017 21:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10219)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
I think the child's parents would be livid if they knew how their son was being used.

It's his own son, dumbass. Pay attention.


ITN,
What happened to it being his step-grandson ? Kind of why I think your in here to win the debate. I think L8112 will come to understand that.
8

And you still haven't told us how a 56 year old man could call someone else a bully. I want to know if you are retarded or what? The L-man hasn't said anything that is half as smart as you have, so expecting any help from that direction ain't gonna happen.


When you're saying I don't know what I'm talking about because you're trusting a 5 y.o.'s opinion that only you know and ITN agrees with you has to be one of the most ignorant things I ever heard of.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is NOT trusting it! He is only stating it!

You really ARE paranoid, aren't you? Why are you so afraid of the opinion of a 5 year old kid??


Just more ignorance. I am going to have to consider that all you and wake has are word games.
After all you and wake took the time to explain why he is credible. And if he's credible then you and wake are credible because he supports the 2 of you. And at the same time both you and wake claim to be adults. That's sad.


And you have taken several entries trying to manufacture an excuse that he isn't credible. Now why do you suppose that is?

Personally, because I believe he is paranoid.

You see already how many things are taken by him as if someone were out to get him, or that someone is 'angry' when they aren't, or that a 5 year old can actually threaten him.


ITN,
I think it's funny that both you and Wake are attacking me personally.

You are taking it personally. Saying you are paranoid is not attacking you.
James_ wrote:
Not whether what I say is accurate or not but you are attacking me as a person.

Again, you are taking it personally. You are not saying anything else at the moment.
James_ wrote:
I think that's because neither one of you know enough to discredit what I say.

You aren't saying anything at the moment except how personally harmed you say you are.
James_ wrote:
And as you both claim, wake's son or is it his step-grandson ? whose opinion you both consider credible because he considers me a con artist ? That's an example on how to slander someone while not having the balls to take responsibility for your own ignorant opinions IMHO.


It is YOU that is making a case out of this. It is YOU that is apparently in fear of a 5 year old kid. It is YOU that is ONLY one claiming anything this kid says is trying to blame a 5 year old kid's comments as slander! It is YOU that is keeping the whole thing going. It was a passing comment...that's all!

This is paranoid.

Now if you want to drop the whole thing. Fine. We can go back to discussing your weird 'science'.


The Parrot Killer
Page 4 of 4<<<234





Join the debate Greenhouse Gases Are Real:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Greenhouse Gases Do NOT Violate The Stefan-Boltzmann Law74322-11-2019 04:54
So what if the Chinese fossil fuel industry pays me to spread lies about greenhouse gas?7515-11-2019 04:47
9 Signs That Prove Climate Change Is Real and Affecting Everyone917-10-2019 03:22
Revealing the 160 year systematic error behind greenhouse theory with Raman Spectroscopy2422-09-2019 22:20
Bill Nye greenhouse gas experiment fail.1616-09-2019 15:51
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact