why

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > why

Page 1 of 4

why31-01-2022 21:19
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	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.
31-01-2022 21:25
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	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. Simple really. The Church of Global Warming is waning. It will never really go away, of course, but like the Church of the Ozone Hole and the Church of Green, more people have figured out the scams that these religions are. The Church of Covid is going through the same thing. Only took a couple of years or less for folks to figure out this scam too. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2022 22:02
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	itn, You misinterpret my post. The point of it was - why so few posters of either persuasion? By the way, there is no church of global warming. It's just a filament of your imagination.
31-01-2022 22:27
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote: itn, You misinterpret my post. The point of it was - why so few posters of either persuasion? RQAA. I already answered this question. Stop being a moron asking the same question over and over. keepit wrote: By the way, there is no church of global warming. There sure as hell is. It is a fundamentalist style religion. You are a believer in it. Like all religions, it is based on an initial circular argument with other arguments extending from that. You worship Gaia, Karl Marx, and Tyrannical Government. Al Gore is the Holy One, sacrificed by Hanging Chad, but rises from the dead from time to time to say something stupid. CO2 is the Holy Gas, which you believe reveals Man's Sins. The Church of Global stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx. keepit wrote: It's just a filament of your imagination. The Church of Green has banned filaments as 'evil'. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2022 22:29
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:itn, You misinterpret my post. Into the Night gave you the correct answer, you just NEED for other reasons to be the case. The Church of Global Warming is dying ... and every day there are fewer and fewer uneducated, rabid, humanity-hating shithead muutherfuuuukkker losers who are itching to pick a fight with rational adults in defense of their stupid religion of hatred and intolerance. I realize that you NEED to blame the rational adults for the failures of the Church of Global Warming. Your hatred and intolerance, and especially your total lack of any education, forces you to live a life of bizarre delusions that all serve as powerful numbing self-medication for your cognitive debilitations. Fine. I get it. keepit wrote: The point of it was - why so few posters of either persuasion? ... because there are fewer uneducated, rabid, humanity-hating shithead muutherfuuuukkker losers who are itching to pick a fight with rational adults in defense of their stupid religion of hatred and intolerance. This reduces the number of responses required to address the fewer fights being picked by those fewer uneducated, rabid, humanity-hating shithead muutherfuuuukkker losers. You don't get what I'm saying, do you? Yep, that's what I'm saying. keepit wrote:By the way, there is no church of global warming. This is just a filament of your denial.

01-02-2022 18:02
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	ibd, your continuing childish rants make you irrelevant and insignificant. I can't figure out why you continue. Is it just your personality or is it a job you get paid for? Seriously, why continue>
01-02-2022 18:20
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:ibd,your continuing childish rants make you irrelevant and insignificant. keepit, do you always project this forcefully? You are an intellectually indigent man combing internet trash heaps for a valid point ... and despite never finding one, ... because you don't know what one looks like ... you continue returning to Climate-Debate with garbage you believe is most likely to be perceived as "value added." Are you ready for some bad news? Attached image:
02-02-2022 04:29
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	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. It's a debate website, not discussion forum... We get by having discussions, but those here to debate, will always try to pick a fight/debate/argument. It's a competition, a sport, a game people play. I'm not so much into the arguing aspects, and tend to walk away pretty quick, when the game is on. There are 'winners', and 'losers'. The losers tend leave the site. New members, who thought to get some insight, are quickly turned away, hostilely. An easy victory, is a quick assault... I don't agree with that tactic, since people have been getting indoctrinated with cult like climate crap for a long time, pretty much an entire generation grew up with it. They are already scared. Why scare them off, with the truth, in such a hostile manner? The planet is doing fine. What concerns me, is the cult take over over governments, who want to take our money, our freedom, independence.
02-02-2022 04:37
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote:...deleted Mantras 1i..39p...1h...RQAA... Trolling. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
02-02-2022 17:32
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	HarveyH55 wrote: New members, who thought to get some insight, are quickly turned away, hostilely. Harvey, I think you are greatly mischaracterizing events. Nobody gets turned away here at Climate-Debate. Yes, there is a problem out there in the world, but that problem spawns elsewhere and finds its way to this website. There is nothing hostile about asking someone to define Climate Change, to specify the "threat" or to justify the premise that hydrocarbons are somehow not renewable. We are totally courteous and polite ... until the problem that docked in our port turns hostile then yes, the tone changes ... but it was the problem that came here that is the problem, not those already here at Climate- Debate. I realize that you are the personality type that doesn't like conflict and I get it. You are a nice person with strength of character. Good on you. ... but just because you see a problem arrive at our website, ... just because you already know that said problem will be POLITELY asked to define, clarify and specify, ... just because you know how it will play out, with the problem being the one to become a bulveristic ashsole who presumes that others (who know so much more) know absolutely nothing and who believes he is a total F'ing genius while exemplifying the very essence of scientific illiteracy, mathematical incompetence and logical ineptitude ... and economics insanity ... ... does not, in any way, pin any blame on anyone here when the people who are doing the thinking for the problem order him to flee in utter panic. In short, I humbly submit that your mischaracterization omitted a few details and ultimately misplaced the "blame". HarveyH55 wrote: I don't agree with that tactic, since people have been getting indoctrinated with cult like climate crap for a long time, pretty much an entire generation grew up with it. They are already scared. Why scare them off, with the truth, in such a hostile manner? So Harvey, since you "went there" ... please tell me, what polite questions concerning clarification would you prefer not be asked? What physics should not be discussed? What science should be "off the table"? What about hydrocarbons, chemistry and/or geology should be avoided when one of these indoctrinated problems comes here to Climate-Debate? I have known for a long time that you become uneasy when there is conflict. I have long-since viewed you as someone who wishes well on his fellow man and would like us all to just get along. I get it. You're a good guy. I just don't know that there's any way to avoid the conflicts you mention without somehow prohibiting indoctrinated problems from coming here. Also worth mentioning is that it appears you fall for that "I'm just here to learn" schtick used by people who are obviously only here to preach. I would recommend that you watch for the intentional "not learning anything" no matter how simple the subject matter or how many times it is explained in detail. If someone is here to preach then that person is not here to learn anything. Nobody is being chased away. Nobody is being attacked. What you are observing are preachers and missionaries who are intent upon imposing their religions onto others. When they realize they aren't going to convert the residents of this house, they leave to go bang on another door.
02-02-2022 18:22
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	ibd, How could i verify all that stuff uyou just said? It sounds kind of esoteric to me. Notice that i d didn't just say, "prove it moron."
02-02-2022 19:12
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:ibd,How could i verify all that stuff uyou just said? Let me ask you, do you know how to verify things? keepit wrote:It sounds kind of esoteric to me. You don't know what the word "esoteric" means. Ask me how I know. keepit wrote:Notice that i d didn't just say, "prove it moron." Yes, I can read.
02-02-2022 19:45
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	I often verify things with google. I do know what esoteric means, i googled it. Yes, you know how to read but can you give a verifiable answer?
02-02-2022 19:52
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	IBdaMann wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: New members, who thought to get some insight, are quickly turned away, hostilely. Harvey, I think you are greatly mischaracterizing events. Nobody gets turned away here at Climate-Debate. Yes, there is a problem out there in the world, but that problem spawns elsewhere and finds its way to this website. There is nothing hostile about asking someone to define Climate Change, to specify the "threat" or to justify the premise that hydrocarbons are somehow not renewable. We are totally courteous and polite ... until the problem that docked in our port turns hostile then yes, the tone changes ... but it was the problem that came here that is the problem, not those already here at Climate- Debate. I realize that you are the personality type that doesn't like conflict and I get it. You are a nice person with strength of character. Good on you. ... but just because you see a problem arrive at our website, ... just because you already know that said problem will be POLITELY asked to define, clarify and specify, ... just because you know how it will play out, with the problem being the one to become a bulveristic ashsole who presumes that others (who know so much more) know absolutely nothing and who believes he is a total F'ing genius while exemplifying the very essence of scientific illiteracy, mathematical incompetence and logical ineptitude ... and economics insanity ... ... does not, in any way, pin any blame on anyone here when the people who are doing the thinking for the problem order him to flee in utter panic. In short, I humbly submit that your mischaracterization omitted a few details and ultimately misplaced the "blame". HarveyH55 wrote: I don't agree with that tactic, since people have been getting indoctrinated with cult like climate crap for a long time, pretty much an entire generation grew up with it. They are already scared. Why scare them off, with the truth, in such a hostile manner? So Harvey, since you "went there" ... please tell me, what polite questions concerning clarification would you prefer not be asked? What physics should not be discussed? What science should be "off the table"? What about hydrocarbons, chemistry and/or geology should be avoided when one of these indoctrinated problems comes here to Climate-Debate? I have known for a long time that you become uneasy when there is conflict. I have long-since viewed you as someone who wishes well on his fellow man and would like us all to just get along. I get it. You're a good guy. I just don't know that there's any way to avoid the conflicts you mention without somehow prohibiting indoctrinated problems from coming here. Also worth mentioning is that it appears you fall for that "I'm just here to learn" schtick used by people who are obviously only here to preach. I would recommend that you watch for the intentional "not learning anything" no matter how simple the subject matter or how many times it is explained in detail. If someone is here to preach then that person is not here to learn anything. Nobody is being chased away. Nobody is being attacked. What you are observing are preachers and missionaries who are intent upon imposing their religions onto others. When they realize they aren't going to convert the residents of this house, they leave to go bang on another door. There have been a lot of new members, basically clueless, and just regurgitating the 'popular' nonsense the were taught, or got off the networks. Little scared and concerned. Just think it should take more effort to show them they were misled, than to slam it into as few posts as possible. They had years of cult indoctrination, they aren't going to see the light immediately. I just find it more effect to post the truth, in a form, that makes them think for themselves. Plants and CO2, is my best angle for this. There is no denying it, it's very easy to verify independently. Almost every city has some sort of commercial indoor growing. I live in a pretty small town, and we have at least two businesses, that sell hydroponics equipment and systems. There is no question about it, plants need more CO2, not less.
02-02-2022 20:57
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	HarveyH55 wrote:Plants and CO2, is my best angle for this. There is no denying it, it's very easy to verify independently. Almost every city has some sort of commercial indoor growing. I live in a pretty small town, and we have at least two businesses, that sell hydroponics equipment and systems. There is no question about it, plants need more CO2, not less. Unfortunately, their premise has nothing to do with plants or what they need. Their premise is that atmospheric CO2 is causing Global Warming, which is driving Climate Change, which is destroying the planet before our eyes, as is observable in every bad weather event and whenever something dies. The absolute proof is the long list of everything that is unverifiable, e.g. all polar ice is disappearing, the oceans are becoming impassable trash heaps, ocean water is turning into a rising mass of caustic acid, perhaps not any glacier near you but all others are disappearing, perhaps not the forest near you but every other one is dying, etc... You need something better than plants and CO2 to address that type of comprehensive, deep-seated and well-packaged misunderstanding. At some point you're going to have to address the underpinning scientific illiteracy with science, the mathematical incompetence with math, and the horrendous logic errors with correct logic. There's no way around it. Then you get the tmiddles and the Pete Rogers types who intentionally play word games on top of all that. Those who come here specifically to be dishonest get no sympathy from me. I totally understand your point of view. You wish things were different, that there wouldn't be what seem like inevitable arguments with newcomers to the site. The bad news is that the inevitability is built into the mindless, indoctrinated before they arrive. I can't fault you for wishing others would be more receptive to correction, but at the same time, I can't fault Into the Night for asking that Climate Change be defined, or gfm7175 for asking that "the threat" be specified, or GasGuzzler for asking what Sven Issen is having for dinner ... they are all valid and polite questions. No one here is, in any way, responsible for the abysmal lack of education of those coming to this site professing to be geniuses. This is not an easy nut to crack, jussayn.

02-02-2022 22:40
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote: I often verify things with google. I do know what esoteric means, i googled it. Yes, you know how to read but can you give a verifiable answer? Google is not a source. It's an indexing system. It's also biased. Google defines no word. Science and mathematics is not 'esoteric'. It is simply what it is. Anyone can learn it. You simply refuse to and would rather deny both of them instead. You ignore and deny statistical mathematics. You ignore and deny probability mathematics. You ignore and deny random number mathematics. You ignore and deny the 1st law of thermodynamics. You ignore and deny the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You ignore and deny the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You ignore and deny Kirchoff's law. You ignore and deny quantum mechanics. Google is not God. You can't just discard theories of science. You can't just discard mathematics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-02-2022 03:37
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	You're just off target itn. It would take too much effort to explain each point. Maybe that's why you flooded the post with extraneous stuff.
03-02-2022 03:59
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:I often verify things with google. Google is not a verification system. Apparently all this time you never knew what Google is. Too funny. keepit wrote:I do know what esoteric means, No, you most certainly do not. You should have asked me how I knew when you had the chance. keepit wrote: i googled it. We're back to our reminder that you don't know what Google is, or how to apply upper case letters. keepit wrote:IYes, you know how to read but can you give a verifiable answer? You didn't answer my question: Do you know how to verify something?
03-02-2022 04:17
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	Silly games ibd. I gave you a good straight forward answer. I don't know why it wasn't good enough.
03-02-2022 07:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:Silly games ibd. You are babbling again. keepit wrote: I gave you a good straight forward answer. Nope. I will be the judge of whether or not you answered my question ... and you did not answer my question in any way, shape or form. The question before you is "Do you know how to verify something?" keepit wrote:I don't know why it wasn't good enough. Exactly, you don't have any idea what constitutes even answering a question. Hint: babbling about unrelated topics does not answer a question.
03-02-2022 07:51
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote: You're just off target itn. It would take too much effort to explain each point. Maybe that's why you flooded the post with extraneous stuff. Void argument fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-02-2022 07:52
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote: Silly games ibd. I gave you a good straight forward answer. I don't know why it wasn't good enough. You gave no answer. You STILL have not answered the many questions put to you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-02-2022 14:53
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	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. IBDm and ITN claim they are not doing it,Then do it.Fascinating. duncan61
03-02-2022 16:25
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote:IBDm and ITN claim they are not breathing on a regular basis,Then do it.Fascinating. Just because you mindless undead of the Greenhouse Effect don't need to breathe in between contradictions, those of us with cardiopulmonary activity still need to fill our lungs with fresh air in order to apply emergency cerebral resuscitation when you go into cognitive arrest. As you can see, it's a thankless job but you'd be totally up Schytt creek without a paddle if we weren't around to give you science to deny.
03-02-2022 18:00
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2932)	IBdaMann wrote: As you can see, it's a thankless job but you'd be totally up Schytt creek without a paddle if we weren't around to give you science to deny. Thank you! Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
03-02-2022 18:06
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	ibd, talk like an adult.
03-02-2022 19:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	keepit wrote: ibd, talk like an adult. He did. Grow up. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-02-2022 19:03
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	keepit wrote: ibd, talk like an adult. keepit, learn what an adult is.
03-02-2022 19:30
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	keepit wrote:ibd, talk like an adult. We adults say "Speak like an adult."
04-02-2022 04:22
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	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. Because it lacks moderation. IBD, GFM and ITN were kicked of Debatepolitics.com for being trolls, and I'm sure other moderated boards. I think Jeppe Branner who owns the forum made it insincerely and is happy to see it online as wreckage. That it's a failed board lends a little support to team denial. If you can't win an argument then a consolation prize is to ensure no debate takes place. See here: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/w-1303-to-believe-or-not-to-believe.343131/page-43?amp=1 where ITN shows as BANNED. As does GFM. And low and behold the topic of discussion is their harassment of the board and not a topic of interest, just like here.

04-02-2022 05:50
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	tmiddles 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. Because it lacks moderation to quash all interesting discussions and conversations. tmiddles wrote:IBD, GFM and ITN were kicked of Debatepolitics.com for being trolls, and I'm sure other moderated boards. So I was just at DebatePolitics looking at my profile and wow, I have been a member there since late 2013. Whoever it is that kicked me off forgot to tell me or the board. Anyway, I just got finished mocking RAMOSS (what a loser) which I guess I didn't do because I supposedly have been kicked off that board ... right? Attached image:
04-02-2022 10:00
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:...I have been a member... Congratulations! Celebrating not being banned somewhere is exactly where you land in society.
04-02-2022 12:28
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	tmiddles 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. Because it lacks moderation. IBD, GFM and ITN were kicked of Debatepolitics.com for being trolls, and I'm sure other moderated boards. This board is moderated. tmiddles wrote: I think Jeppe Branner who owns the forum made it insincerely and is happy to see it online as wreckage. That it's a failed board lends a little support to team denial. Since you don't like Branner, why are you on this forum? tmiddles wrote: If you can't win an argument then a consolation prize is to ensure no debate takes place. There is no debate on forums. Only conversations. tmiddles wrote: See here: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/w-1303-to-believe-or-not-to-believe.343131/page-43?amp=1 where ITN shows as BANNED. As does GFM. And low and behold the topic of discussion is their harassment of the board and not a topic of interest, just like here. Debatepolitics.com is a biased forum. It is YOU that is complaining about the forum here. You are describing yourself. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-02-2022 12:32
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...I have been a member... Congratulations! Celebrating not being banned somewhere is exactly where you land in society. I celebrate being banned from there. It's a biased forum. It is nothing more than a kiddie pool. Censorship doesn't work. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-02-2022 12:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...I have been a member... Congratulations! Celebrating not being banned somewhere is exactly where you land in society. Aaawww, is po-widdle tmiddles pouting over yet another failed attempt to make his petty hatred for humanity appear as righteousness? One can only imagine how much your life must totally suck if you live in constant need for differing views to be censored out of existence. The telltale sign of a truly miserable fuuk is the abject need for moderators to silence those who are actually educated. tmiddles, you are a loser. You are only here to preach and to disrupt conversations. You are a dishonest hater and frankly, I don't believe you are capable of contributing intellectually to a conversation. You can't even distinguish between different people much less between religion and science. Loser.
04-02-2022 17:41
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles 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. Because it lacks moderation. Branner exists, dude. This site has moderation, and allows people to freely speak their mind without moderation acting as the thought police. tmiddles wrote: IBD, GFM and ITN were kicked of Debatepolitics.com for being trolls, Nope... I was kicked off of that forum because I outwitted a moderator while calling him and a number of his fellow moderators out for their forum antics, thus he threw a hissy fit about it and made a big spectacle out of "someone in the thread being a sock" and that this person would "soon be banned". Turns out that the person he was making a spectacle of in that thread was me, and turns out that ITN was banned at that same time (both of us being banned under the guise of "multiple accounts", which is a verifiably false claim). A number of the mods there simply wanted both of us gone, plain and simple (because we were giving them fits intellectually), so they made it happen. There used to be a handful of good mods there, but they all got pushed out one by one (and the final one even made some quite revealing exposures about the mods there upon his departure from the forum, knowing that he'd subsequently be banned by the other mods for making said exposures). It was quite the interesting place, that's for sure. As for IBD, I wouldn't know whether or not he was even on DebatePolitics at all, let alone if he ever got banned from there. I believe I first met him on here after he returned from his Climate Debate forum hiatus (and I think that was after I was banned from DebatePolitics, but I don't recall the exact timing of it). tmiddles wrote: and I'm sure other moderated boards. I have only ever been banned from DebatePolitics. tmiddles wrote: I think Jeppe Branner who owns the forum made it insincerely and is happy to see it online as wreckage. That it's a failed board lends a little support to team denial. If you can't win an argument then a consolation prize is to ensure no debate takes place. See here: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/w-1303-to-believe-or-not-to-believe.343131/page-43?amp=1 where ITN shows as BANNED. As does GFM. And low and behold the topic of discussion is their harassment of the board and not a topic of interest, just like here. No board harassment occurred. It was just the same leftist chatter about "I SEE SOCK PEOPLE!!!" any time they can't form a counter argument.
04-02-2022 17:51
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles 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. Because it lacks moderation to quash all interesting discussions and conversations. tmiddles wrote:IBD, GFM and ITN were kicked of Debatepolitics.com for being trolls, and I'm sure other moderated boards. So I was just at DebatePolitics looking at my profile and wow, I have been a member there since late 2013. Whoever it is that kicked me off forgot to tell me or the board. Anyway, I just got finished mocking RAMOSS (what a loser) which I guess I didn't do because I supposedly have been kicked off that board ... right? Ahhhh, so tmiddles was making schitt up again... typical. I guess if I ever ran into you on that forum I do not remember doing so. --- And yes, RAMOSS is a total loser. I remember the days when I'd go back and forth with him on various topics.
04-02-2022 17:54
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...I have been a member... Congratulations! Celebrating not being banned somewhere is exactly where you land in society. So are you now admitting that you were being a totally dishonest schitt when you accused IBD of being banned from DebatePolitics??
04-02-2022 18:00
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...I have been a member... Congratulations! Celebrating not being banned somewhere is exactly where you land in society. Aaawww, is po-widdle tmiddles pouting over yet another failed attempt to make his petty hatred for humanity appear as righteousness? One can only imagine how much your life must totally suck if you live in constant need for differing views to be censored out of existence. The telltale sign of a truly miserable fuuk is the abject need for moderators to silence those who are actually educated. tmiddles, you are a loser. You are only here to preach and to disrupt conversations. You are a dishonest hater and frankly, I don't believe you are capable of contributing intellectually to a conversation. You can't even distinguish between different people much less between religion and science. Loser. Be careful, you might scare the coward off into the shadows again...
04-02-2022 18:33
Spongy Iris★★★★☆ (1643)	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. Edited on 04-02-2022 18:35

Page 1 of 4

Join the debate why: