itn

keepit wrote:
Itn,
Can you prove you're not a robot?
I've read about robots (computers) being able to do some mental operations extremely well and efficiently but nevertheless aren't able to understand points of view that humans easily understand. You seem to miss the point so many times it makes me (and tmiddles) wonder why.

keepit wrote:
im a bm,
If he's a bot, and that's a big if, he was developed about 15 years ago. That would explain the unsophistication. I'm not so sure about the other posters either.

keepit wrote:
im a bm,
That's a lot of posts. What would motivate a person to post that much? Seriously, inquiring minds want to know.

Im a BM wrote:

keepit wrote:
im a bm,
That's a lot of posts. What would motivate a person to post that much? Seriously, inquiring minds want to know.

Yes, that IS a lot of posts.

What would motivate a person to post that much?

Given the NATURE of those posts, I would suggest that malignant narcissism is one motivating factor.

Loneliness and a desperate need for attention, facilitated by anonymity, in an empty life without meaningful relationships or activities might be another factor.

But I still think that in this case, the bottom line is very simple.

The only goal is to be a troll.

Im a BM wrote: Or should we wait a few weeks longer, postponing the celebration until it reaches the threshold of 222,222 posts.

That would be six twos in a row, and it kind of looks cooler than 22,000.

keepit wrote:
Itn,
Can you prove you're not a robot?
I've read about robots (computers) being able to do some mental operations extremely well and efficiently but nevertheless aren't able to understand points of view that humans easily understand. You seem to miss the point so many times it makes me (and tmiddles) wonder why.

Im a BM wrote:

keepit wrote:
Itn,
Can you prove you're not a robot?
I've read about robots (computers) being able to do some mental operations extremely well and efficiently but nevertheless aren't able to understand points of view that humans easily understand. You seem to miss the point so many times it makes me (and tmiddles) wonder why.

Newest insight into possible explanation.

ITN often references God and religion.

"Church of Global Warming", "biogeochemistry is a religious artifact", "religion of climate change", etc.

And "Google is not God" is a favorite rebuttal to any reference found in a Google search.

Perhaps most revealing, "Google is not a source"

I had been interpreting his proclamations as Royal Decrees.

Based on nothing but his own authority as king of omniscience and scientific infallibility. Never citing ANY "source", except maybe the vaguest of references to some law of thermodynamics.

But, "Google is not God" and "Google is not a source".

Maybe God is the "source".

Maybe it isn't the most incredible arrogance of believing his own scientific knowledge to be so superior.

He must certainly realize he has no scientific education, degree, or anything that passes for credibility.

Maybe he gets his superior knowledge straight from the "source".

Maybe it was God who told him that the first law of thermodynamics prevents the escape of helium from the Earth's atmosphere.

keepit wrote:
im a bm,
I don't think he's a robot. A robot wouldn't actually be annoying.

Im a BM wrote: ITN often references God and religion.

Im a BM wrote: "Church of Global Warming", "biogeochemistry is a religious artifact", "religion of climate change", etc.

Im a BM wrote: Maybe it isn't the most incredible arrogance of believing his own scientific knowledge to be so superior.

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: ITN often references God and religion.

By "often", do you mean "rarely"?

This is why you, moreso than others, need to define your terms. You are completely contrarian.

Im a BM wrote: "Church of Global Warming", "biogeochemistry is a religious artifact", "religion of climate change", etc.

Correct me if I am mistaken but you are the one who raises issues of your religion. Into the Night isn't the one who deludes himself into believing that the earth's average global equilibrium temperature is somehow increasing, and in violation of thermodynamics; that's all you. Also, Into the Night is not the one treating an element as pollution or panicking under the absurd pretense that the ocean is somehow losing its alkalinity; that's you as well. All of this WACKY Climate religion crap is coming from you. Why are you trying to blame Into the Night for it? Do you imagine that you are going to fool someone other than keepit?

Your religion, like all others, is founded on undefined terms, which you have made abundantly clear. You are the one who often/always raises religious issues and then tries to peddle them as science in one bizarre sermon after another. What I don't get is how you manage to delude yourself into thinking that it is Into the Night doing it.

And we need to have a conversation about your peculiar belief that Google is somehow God.

Im a BM wrote: Maybe it isn't the most incredible arrogance of believing his own scientific knowledge to be so superior.

Correct. It's not arrogance that affords him a superior scientific understanding to yours. An education will do that.

You must certainly realize that you have no ability to contribute to any discussion of science. Your firm belief that your religion is somehow thettled thienth is not enough to make your religion somehow value-added.

Im a BM wrote: I had forgotten all about the cult leader.

Im a BM wrote: Some religious cults demand BELIEF from their followers.

keepit wrote:
ibd,
Your false accusations tell a story.

keepit wrote:
ibd,
Your false accusations tell a story.

keepit wrote: ibd, Your false accusations tell a story.

keepit wrote:
ibd,
Always spouting vitriol. How can you stand it?

keepit wrote:
There's a lot of trash talk coming out of you today itn. What's the problem?

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
There's a lot of trash talk coming out of you today itn. What's the problem?

You are describing yourself again, keepit. You cannot blame YOUR problem on anybody else.

Im a BM wrote:They WANT the discussion to be so ugly that it drives away everyone except like-minded trolls.

And they almost succeeded. The 125 who joined after I first posted are not participating. Maybe because ALL of them were evil gullible Marxist puppets blah blah blah.

Im a BM wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
There's a lot of trash talk coming out of you today itn. What's the problem?

You are describing yourself again, keepit. You cannot blame YOUR problem on anybody else.

"You are describing yourself again.."

Into the Night is a PEST.

Doesn't know how to pretend to make an argument about "science" without throwing in a bunch of "trash talk".

They WANT the discussion to be so ugly that it drives away everyone except like-minded trolls.

And they almost succeeded.

The 125 who joined after I first posted are not participating.

Maybe because ALL of them were evil gullible Marxist puppets blah blah blah.

Into the Night wrote:
Stop whining.

Im a BM wrote:
125 new members joined climate-debate.com after I first posted two years ago.

If they wanted to ask trolls for their scientific insights, they would have gotten plenty of responses.

If they wanted personal attention from trolls, they could have gotten a lot of it.

Almost anything they posted was sure to get multiple replies.

If they wanted to be offered insights into their own beliefs and motives, the trolls would have been happy to tell them that they are scientifically illiterate Marxists who came here to preach their WACKY religion.

If they enjoy being called "moron", "dumbass", "retard", "idiot", etc.

How could they resist such an attractive opportunity?

It wasn't attractive enough to keep ANY of those 125 new members.

Or nearly any of the 1600 members who joined before them.

Im a BM wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
There's a lot of trash talk coming out of you today itn. What's the problem?

You are describing yourself again, keepit. You cannot blame YOUR problem on anybody else.

"You are describing yourself again.."

Into the Night is a PEST.

Doesn't know how to pretend to make an argument about "science" without throwing in a bunch of "trash talk".

They WANT the discussion to be so ugly that it drives away everyone except like-minded trolls.

And they almost succeeded.

The 125 who joined after I first posted are not participating.

Maybe because ALL of them were evil gullible Marxist puppets blah blah blah.

Im a BM wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
[quote]keepit wrote:
There's a lot of trash talk coming out of you today itn. What's the problem?

You are describing yourself again, keepit. You cannot blame YOUR problem on anybody else.