Remember me
▼ Content

True Believers


True Believers17-02-2017 19:35
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.
17-02-2017 19:42
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
You cannot possibly know what qualifications the people here have. This is just another of your obvious lies. Keep them coming though. It's fun pointing them out.
17-02-2017 19:46
spot
★★★★☆
(1323)
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.


I think I told you my qualifications, Surface detail did as well. It begs the question what are your qualifications? If I'm being charitable if you have any qualifications at all they are something to do with engineering that you obtained in the dim and distant past.

I can't see why it makes you think you are able just make pronouncements on a field you clearly have not spent a lot of time looking into.


IBdaMann wrote:
"Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody.


Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
17-02-2017 19:51
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
spot wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.


I think I told you my qualifications, Surface detail did as well. It begs the question what are your qualifications? If I'm being charitable if you have any qualifications at all they are something to do with engineering that you obtained in the dim and distant past.

I can't see why it makes you think you are able just make pronouncements on a field you clearly have not spent a lot of time looking into.

Wake's obsession with qualifications is strange, given that he dismisses the views of people known to be highly qualified, such as the authors of scientific papers and the staff of institutions such as NASA and NOAA.
17-02-2017 20:01
spot
★★★★☆
(1323)
Surface Detail wrote:
spot wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.


I think I told you my qualifications, Surface detail did as well. It begs the question what are your qualifications? If I'm being charitable if you have any qualifications at all they are something to do with engineering that you obtained in the dim and distant past.

I can't see why it makes you think you are able just make pronouncements on a field you clearly have not spent a lot of time looking into.

Wake's obsession with qualifications is strange, given that he dismisses the views of people known to be highly qualified, such as the authors of scientific papers and the staff of institutions such as NASA and NOAA.


Its a win win way of looking at it from his point of view I guess, you, me and the vast majority of people commenting on this have no formal training on the subject, specifically climate change science so why listen to us. The few people that have however are biased. The very act of learning about this is brainwashing and having a job in the field shows that you are part of a cabal and everything you say can safely be dismissed.


IBdaMann wrote:
"Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody.


Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
17-02-2017 20:12
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.


Climate scientist went away to get the evidence and mechanism which is draining central Greenland of ice mass. Without this science the idea that NASA is lying about the mass balance change of Greenland is not possible to oppose.
17-02-2017 20:19
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.

Climate scientist is female, by the way, as you would know if you had actually read her posts. She and Abraham3 were two of the most knowledgable posters on this forum.
17-02-2017 20:22
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
spot wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
spot wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.


I think I told you my qualifications, Surface detail did as well. It begs the question what are your qualifications? If I'm being charitable if you have any qualifications at all they are something to do with engineering that you obtained in the dim and distant past.

I can't see why it makes you think you are able just make pronouncements on a field you clearly have not spent a lot of time looking into.

Wake's obsession with qualifications is strange, given that he dismisses the views of people known to be highly qualified, such as the authors of scientific papers and the staff of institutions such as NASA and NOAA.


Its a win win way of looking at it from his point of view I guess, you, me and the vast majority of people commenting on this have no formal training on the subject, specifically climate change science so why listen to us. The few people that have however are biased. The very act of learning about this is brainwashing and having a job in the field shows that you are part of a cabal and everything you say can safely be dismissed.

You make a very good point. It saddens me how many people are fooled by this "logic".
18-02-2017 22:50
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.

Climate scientist is female, by the way, as you would know if you had actually read her posts. She and Abraham3 were two of the most knowledgable posters on this forum.


Do you suppose you could describe in detail what it matters the sex of "climate scientist"? Are you sexist? Or are you trying to imply that using a masculine pronoun is sexist towards someone that uses a gender neutral name?

Are you inferring that she is more or less capable because of the sex of Climate Scientist? Or that her or his sex is any of your business?
18-02-2017 23:15
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.

Climate scientist is female, by the way, as you would know if you had actually read her posts. She and Abraham3 were two of the most knowledgable posters on this forum.


Do you suppose you could describe in detail what it matters the sex of "climate scientist"? Are you sexist? Or are you trying to imply that using a masculine pronoun is sexist towards someone that uses a gender neutral name?

Are you inferring that she is more or less capable because of the sex of Climate Scientist? Or that her or his sex is any of your business?

No need to get your knickers in a twist. It was just an FYI.
19-02-2017 05:14
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Wake wrote
r are you trying to imply that....Are you inferring that...

I neither imply or infer, but state readily that wake is "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up".
19-02-2017 18:57
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
As we have seen here the only people that are supporting the idea of AGW are the people that have no qualifications (save, perhaps, Climate Scientist who was so embarrassed by those supporting him that it seems he has fled the forum for intellectual discussions).

This being the case I can see no point in watching little children playing with themselves.

Climate scientist is female, by the way, as you would know if you had actually read her posts. She and Abraham3 were two of the most knowledgable posters on this forum.


Do you suppose you could describe in detail what it matters the sex of "climate scientist"? Are you sexist? Or are you trying to imply that using a masculine pronoun is sexist towards someone that uses a gender neutral name?

Are you inferring that she is more or less capable because of the sex of Climate Scientist? Or that her or his sex is any of your business?

No need to get your knickers in a twist. It was just an FYI.


It was not an FYI. It was your demonstration of your vast knowledge of people and how you can tell the good from the bad. YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.
19-02-2017 20:02
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Wake wrote:.....YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.


Trafn, before it left two years ago(?), had excellent comments on the friends of "wake-me-up":
"...how to deal with ****s like IBdaMann, Into the Night, and Tim the plumber, so that when you meet other trolls on other websites, you will be better able to deal with their bullshit...."
19-02-2017 21:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(12315)
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote:.....YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.


Trafn, before it left two years ago(?), had excellent comments on the friends of "wake-me-up":
"...how to deal with ****s like IBdaMann, Into the Night, and Tim the plumber, so that when you meet other trolls on other websites, you will be better able to deal with their bullshit...."


He didn't leave. He was booted off the board.


The Parrot Killer
19-02-2017 21:27
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Into the Night wrote:
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote:.....YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.


Trafn, before it left two years ago(?), had excellent comments on the friends of "wake-me-up":
"...how to deal with ****s like IBdaMann, Into the Night, and Tim the plumber, so that when you meet other trolls on other websites, you will be better able to deal with their bullshit...."


He didn't leave. He was booted off the board.


Apparently Chief Crazyass also doesn't know I wasn't a member of the board at that time. But we won't hold is total ignorance against him. We'll just laugh at him like the brain-dead freak he is. His mother and father both used illegal drugs heavily so I'm sure it isn't his fault that he does as well. He has even made up a "native American" ethnicity to try and gain some sort of stature in his own mind. But Indians don't talk about the white man because they now own all the Casinos in the non-gambling states and are making it rich big time off of them.
19-02-2017 23:55
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Wake wrote:Apparently Chief Crazyass also doesn't know I wasn't a member of the board at that time.

I knew that you came long after others had accurate characterizations of your present lovers. Just wanted you to know your flames were flaming & all burnt up before you took a shine to them..... in all their (& your) carbon ugliness..... you desperately racist pig.
20-02-2017 00:18
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" barks: He didn't leave. He was booted off the board.

If "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" & the other old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiners haven't been kicked off this forum (& they haven't), my original assessment of this webcyst (website?-- Nah) is correct.
21-02-2017 21:11
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote:.....YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.


Trafn, before it left two years ago(?), had excellent comments on the friends of "wake-me-up":
"...how to deal with ****s like IBdaMann, Into the Night, and Tim the plumber, so that when you meet other trolls on other websites, you will be better able to deal with their bullshit...."


Ahhh.....

That's why you are trying to burry threads with digging up old ones.

Yes, Taffin the mad was booted off the forum. For just insulting people and not making any actual arguments. Sound familure?
21-02-2017 22:29
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Tim the plumber wrote:
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote:.....YOU and your kind are the reason that Climate Scientist fled this forum. You would embarrass a skunk.


Trafn, before it left two years ago(?), had excellent comments on the friends of "wake-me-up":
"...how to deal with ****s like IBdaMann, Into the Night, and Tim the plumber, so that when you meet other trolls on other websites, you will be better able to deal with their bullshit...."


Ahhh.....

That's why you are trying to burry threads with digging up old ones.

Yes, Taffin the mad was booted off the forum. For just insulting people and not making any actual arguments. Sound familure?


I have found that totally ignoring Chief Crazyass solves most of the problems. spot isn't stupid and is slowly educating himself out of the looney ideas that the media has forced down the throats of the Millennial Generation. Surface only isn't in the business of learning anything. He is here to rant period. He pisses me off occasionally because he so obviously isn't as stupid as he pretends, but then I realize that it is strictly political. He will voice the opinions of the liberals truth or not.
21-02-2017 23:43
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged:... burry (sic).... Sound familure (sic)

You need to bury your familiar writing. Its strange you can't spell "familiar". Its got part of your name (liar) in its correct spelling.
25-02-2017 02:19
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Wake wrote: I have found that totally ignoring Chief Crazyass....

Oh.... then the following is new to you:
For 386+ STRAIGHT months, global Earth temperatures have been above the 20th century average. This has occurred DESPITE the solar TSI energy output being languid for decades, & below normal for 10 years (including a 3+ year period of low solar TSI energy setting a 100 year low). When the sun returns to normal (& it will because it has INCREASED very slowly for 5 billion years), AGW effects will increase strongly. In late 2016, the Present High Arctic Berserker, or PHAB, or FAB ( over- temperatures on nearly 4 million square kilometers of the High Arctic), jumped to 20degC over-temperature. MIND YOU!! This is NOT a local city temperature over say a 20 kilometer by 20 kilometer square. It is over a square almost 2000 kilometers by 2000 kilometers. Within the last 2 years in the MIDDLE OF WINTER, our Earth's North Pole heated above the freezing point of water for short times, on three occasions. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the to date Arctic sea ice average year for the 1980's. The energy to melt such a cube of ice (almost 22 kilometers by 22 kilometers by 65000 feet high) is about 33 times the annual energy used by the United States of America. Lesser ice losses are occurring in the Antarctic (but increasing).
Edited on 25-02-2017 02:20




Join the debate True Believers:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
What if everything alarmist say is true.6704-02-2020 20:57
Is it not true that brains shrink due to increase in CO2 displacing O2?208-11-2019 18:45
It's not true leftists are climate advocates201-05-2019 00:24
How is this even true? CO2e is now over 500 ppm this year?508-02-2019 23:42
The True Believers Revealed120-11-2017 20:03
▲ 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 © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact