why

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Oh please do try to define Climate change. Inevitably, it will bring all the misinformation spewed by the Church to the surface for rational examination. It's a good discussion. Go for it!

Spongy Iris wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Oh please do try to define Climate change. Inevitably, it will bring all the misinformation spewed by the Church to the surface for rational examination. It's a good discussion. Go for it!

I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

Spongy Iris wrote:I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

GasGuzzler wrote:..and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Everybody is talking in a vacuum.

Spongy Iris wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Oh please do try to define Climate change. Inevitably, it will bring all the misinformation spewed by the Church to the surface for rational examination. It's a good discussion. Go for it!

I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:..and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

I pretend it's what I control/adjust in my car. It has its own dials and buttons.

Yes, only human activity causes Climate Change.

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Oh please do try to define Climate change. Inevitably, it will bring all the misinformation spewed by the Church to the surface for rational examination. It's a good discussion. Go for it!

I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

...and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

Spongy Iris wrote:
I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

Spongy Iris wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

keepit wrote:
Why are there so few people on this website.? I've been looking in and commenting here for 2 years and i haven't seen many people that actually comment.

I'm going to blame the lacking participation on this site on the Climate Change issue itself.

Nobody knows why Climate Change is a risk, and what to do about it.

As key pit might say, Climate Change is very esoteric.

You're going to have to define 'climate change'. You're talking in a vacuum.

I'm not going to waste time arguing with you.

Oh please do try to define Climate change. Inevitably, it will bring all the misinformation spewed by the Church to the surface for rational examination. It's a good discussion. Go for it!

I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

...and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

Climate change refers to a biblical event. The flood.

Before the flood, people lived over 900 years. After the flood, they barely made it past 100 years. The climate had changed.

tmiddles wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

Yeah I'd at least prefer a false sense of victory when someone actually debated the topic.

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

GasGuzzler wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:..and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

I pretend it's what I control/adjust in my car. It has its own dials and buttons.

Yes, only human activity causes Climate Change.

Yes! Brutal cold where gfm and myself live. Always prudent to carry a Climate failure survival kit.

tmiddles wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:I can only take so much of you losers pretending to win the debate against me.

Yeah I'd at least prefer a false sense of victory when someone actually debated the topic.

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:..and I can only take so much of you losers pretending to know what Climate is.

I pretend it's what I control/adjust in my car. It has its own dials and buttons.

Yes, only human activity causes Climate Change.

Yes! Brutal cold where gfm and myself live. Always prudent to carry a Climate failure survival kit.

Don't go off half-cocked and blow your Wheaties into the shitter.

Well, actually, I suppose you could.

The point is to always remember that if your activity is to increase the temperature then your climate control is causing Climate Warming ... and if your activity is to lower the temperature then your climate control is causing Climate Change.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

I have pointed out the risks to you already in various conversations and debates over the years.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

I have pointed out the risks to you already in various conversations and debates over the years.

Evasion. Do you think another Flood is coming?

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

I have pointed out the risks to you already in various conversations and debates over the years.

Evasion. Do you think another Flood is coming?

No. Read Genesis 9:11.

Still, the risks need to be pointed out.

GasGuzzler wrote:So God only controls the floodwaters? Got it.

duncan61 wrote:
She is not preaching or being dishonest. The steel ball analogy was a ripper. The second ball rusted and changed.

duncan61 wrote:He/She is not preaching or being dishonest.

duncan61 wrote:The steel ball analogy was a ripper.

duncan61 wrote: The second ball rusted and changed.

duncan61 wrote: you people are just nasty as cats poo

duncan61 wrote: Enough gun deals with it well and seasoned posters can soon pick up a new poster that has come back from before.

gfm7175 wrote:And yes, RAMOSS is a total loser. I remember the days when I'd go back and forth with him on various topics.

RAMOSS said:
Well, I can tell you are a moron.

You obviously can't tell much of anything. You can't distinguish between separate people. You are probably one of those scientifically illiterate warmizombies. You believe in Greenhouse Effect don't you? What an idiot.

RAMOSS said:
And, I have had no contact with you previously,

You don't know how thankful I am. I read your post and remembered that the world's stupidest people go around screaming SOCK! SOCK! SOCK! ... instead of actually contributing cognitively to any discussions. Tell me, why would it even matter if someone were using two avatars? I'll answer that for you. For stupid people like you, you have no rebuttals for valid arguments ... so you make petty personal attacks and try to divert attention away from the discussion toward the person who is humiliating the schytt out of you.

RAMOSS said:
Are you a sock of GFM7175 and Into the night.

If it will make it easier for your puny brain to process, sure, treat me like a SOCK! After all, there isn't much hope of you coming up with any other sort of independent thinking, right? In fact, it will probably make you feel better to just type the word SOCK! in all upper case a few times. By the way, what's the typical number of times you need to get your fix, anyway?

Oooops, I know, I know ... I'm using a lot of words and your attention span is good for about five. Well, if you got this far then sure, call me a SOCK! It will relieve you of all responsibility to add value to the board.

RAMOSS said:
I know one thing that is common to both of them.. they BOTH are banned.

Yeah, and ...? I admit that I am encouraged by your ability to count to two.

So, I realize that you are an intellectual coward, but do you have any verifiable redeeming qualities?

Can you point to any commentary you have made on this site that is a value-added contribution?

RAMOSS said:
Maybe you are trying to follow their pattern?

They have a pattern? What would that be? I'll be sure to let them know. I'll bet they aren't even aware they have a pattern. ... or is it patterns (plural)?

RAMOSS said:
I noticed both of them joined during the time you were not posted (you stopped posting in 2015), and they wiereh in from 2017/2018 to within a day of each other in 2019, and you didn't post between 2015 and until today. So, both of them were posting during your absence. Same areas of posting as you, but your posting history wasn't in the same time frame.

SO, maybe you are a sock.

Have you ever considered, perhaps, performing a critical analysis on the content of their posts rather than wasting time failing utterly in basic logic attempting to draw conclusions from posting dates?

Are you telling me that you never learned that people invite their friends to join forums that they like? You never thought to conclude that a short timespan between their user registrations, and not a long one, is a sign that they are friends? No? It never occurred to you?

I thought not.

Is there anything you'd like me to tell them? Are there any messages you'd like me to pass along? Coherent ones, obviously.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

I have pointed out the risks to you already in various conversations and debates over the years.

Evasion. Do you think another Flood is coming?

No. Read Genesis 9:11.

Still, the risks need to be pointed out.

duncan61 wrote:
IBDm Wrote
... and yet you remain too stupid to see that there are two different objects in question here. How brain-dead must you be? Any child with Down syndrome can see that there is a shiny steel ball with one emissivity and a rusty ball with a different emissivity, i.e. two different objects being analyzed. Shall I just presume that you don't know how to count to two? Did you never get that high?

You are an uneducated moron. You came here to ridicule people of a competing religion and inadvertently revealed that you are the stupid one in the equation.
Duncan wrote
The energy is the same input

IBDaMann wrote:. and yet you [duncan] remain too stupid to see that there are two different objects in question here. How brain-dead must you be? Any child with Down syndrome can see that there is a shiny steel ball with one emissivity and a rusty ball with a different emissivity, i.e. two different objects being analyzed.

duncan61 confirmed that he is too stupid to see any two objects in order to even acknowledge them::The energy is the same input

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

So you think another Flood is coming?

I have pointed out the risks to you already in various conversations and debates over the years.

Evasion. Do you think another Flood is coming?

No. Read Genesis 9:11.

Still, the risks need to be pointed out.

So you want to argue a paradox. Fine. That's irrational.

Spongy Iris wrote:God's word on the matter has been around for a long time.

Spongy Iris wrote:And nobody understands it.

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:And yes, RAMOSS is a total loser. I remember the days when I'd go back and forth with him on various topics.

I just posted a response to RAMOSS ...

RAMOSS said:
Well, I can tell you are a moron.

You obviously can't tell much of anything. You can't distinguish between separate people. You are probably one of those scientifically illiterate warmizombies. You believe in Greenhouse Effect don't you? What an idiot.

RAMOSS said:
And, I have had no contact with you previously,

You don't know how thankful I am. I read your post and remembered that the world's stupidest people go around screaming SOCK! SOCK! SOCK! ... instead of actually contributing cognitively to any discussions. Tell me, why would it even matter if someone were using two avatars? I'll answer that for you. For stupid people like you, you have no rebuttals for valid arguments ... so you make petty personal attacks and try to divert attention away from the discussion toward the person who is humiliating the schytt out of you.

RAMOSS said:
Are you a sock of GFM7175 and Into the night.

If it will make it easier for your puny brain to process, sure, treat me like a SOCK! After all, there isn't much hope of you coming up with any other sort of independent thinking, right? In fact, it will probably make you feel better to just type the word SOCK! in all upper case a few times. By the way, what's the typical number of times you need to get your fix, anyway?

Oooops, I know, I know ... I'm using a lot of words and your attention span is good for about five. Well, if you got this far then sure, call me a SOCK! It will relieve you of all responsibility to add value to the board.

RAMOSS said:
I know one thing that is common to both of them.. they BOTH are banned.

Yeah, and ...? I admit that I am encouraged by your ability to count to two.

So, I realize that you are an intellectual coward, but do you have any verifiable redeeming qualities?

Can you point to any commentary you have made on this site that is a value-added contribution?

RAMOSS said:
Maybe you are trying to follow their pattern?

They have a pattern? What would that be? I'll be sure to let them know. I'll bet they aren't even aware they have a pattern. ... or is it patterns (plural)?

RAMOSS said:
I noticed both of them joined during the time you were not posted (you stopped posting in 2015), and they wiereh in from 2017/2018 to within a day of each other in 2019, and you didn't post between 2015 and until today. So, both of them were posting during your absence. Same areas of posting as you, but your posting history wasn't in the same time frame.

SO, maybe you are a sock.

Have you ever considered, perhaps, performing a critical analysis on the content of their posts rather than wasting time failing utterly in basic logic attempting to draw conclusions from posting dates?

Are you telling me that you never learned that people invite their friends to join forums that they like? You never thought to conclude that a short timespan between their user registrations, and not a long one, is a sign that they are friends? No? It never occurred to you?

I thought not.

Is there anything you'd like me to tell them? Are there any messages you'd like me to pass along? Coherent ones, obviously.

Into the Night wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
IBDm Wrote
... and yet you remain too stupid to see that there are two different objects in question here. How brain-dead must you be? Any child with Down syndrome can see that there is a shiny steel ball with one emissivity and a rusty ball with a different emissivity, i.e. two different objects being analyzed. Shall I just presume that you don't know how to count to two? Did you never get that high?

You are an uneducated moron. You came here to ridicule people of a competing religion and inadvertently revealed that you are the stupid one in the equation.
Duncan wrote
The energy is the same input

Energy is not an input or an output.

duncan61 wrote:If you can tell me the correct term for sunlight hitting an object in space I will accept

duncan61 wrote:
It really does not matter. The rusty ball in space is hypothetical. Mankind has modified the planets surface with roads and buildings and possibly made a tiny difference to the global temperature. As far as I am aware the Earths orbit is not circular but elliptic so at times we are further from the sun and sometimes closer.If any of the doomsday predictions actually start happening I am sure we will adapt

duncan61 wrote:ITN has claimed I have used the wrong term.I have asked for the correct term for sunlight hitting an object in space.If it is not energy input what is it? where are you going with this?He took the time to tell me I was wrong