Telamon wrote:
In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Billy Burpelson wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media
Institute"? What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What
scientific proof do they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
MNMikeW wrote:

Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.
Nothing to do with "shoot the messenger". Or lib. Or conservative.

It is a scientific topic and therefore a perfectly legitimate question
to ask what their scientific qualifications are.

It is always a good idea to assess and examine credentials or to see who
are the sponsors of a study.

Oh yeah, your credentials as a dumb ass Usenet poster boy are very
impressive.

And your credentials of pretending to be hot **** when you are nothing
more than cold **** in a Dixie cup are even more impressive!

JB

dxAce wrote:

John Barnard wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media Institute"?
What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What scientific proof do
they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.



The National Academy of Sciences agrees with Mann and not with the
"Business and Media Institute".

Are you guys in Mn ever going to get your other Senator?

Maybe as soon as you f00kin dumbass Canucks who thought you could tax your way
to prosperity can get your excrement together in one sack!



I have no doubt that my standard of living is better than what you have!
After all, I don't need alcohol to blind me to reality!


JB

MNMikeW wrote:
"John Barnard" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media Institute"?
What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What scientific proof do
they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.
The National Academy of Sciences agrees with Mann and not with the
"Business and Media Institute".

Are you guys in Mn ever going to get your other Senator?

JB

Next year perhaps.



Leave it to lawyers to mess things up.

JB

dxAce wrote:

John Barnard wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:
"dave" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

Sensor drift, google it.
Give it up. You are a tool of entrenched carbon industries.
Whereas you are just a tool.



Speaking of tools, I hope that you didn't donate to the Coleman campaign
using a credit card. Sorry SOB didn't let anyone know that their data
had been compromised. RIP - Coleman!

Never listen to dumbass Canucks, no matter what dey say!

Da dxAce never done steer no one wrong!



You go around in circles all the time! And that's the worst kind of
steering that exists!

JB

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Billy Burpelson wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:

There has been no warming for last 10 years yet CO levels continue to
rise.
Billy Burpelson wrote:

Well, OK, no warming. If you say so...but then what would explain all
those glaciers and polar ice that is melting? Somebody used Photoshop
(tm) to doctor the hundreds of satellite and terrestrial pictures that
have been published over the last several years showing the melting? ALL
those pictures are fraudulent?

Also, I think you meant C02 (carbon dioxide), not CO (carbon monoxide).
Telamon wrote:

They melt every year in the summer time Billy. It's nothing new or
different. Can you guess what happens in the winter time? I'll bet you
can.
Yes indeed, there are seasonal changes. Congratulations on your
intuitive grasp of...the obvious.
I grew up on the east coast so I know about the seasons.

Unfortunately, if you had done even the tiniest bit of homework, you
would realize that there has been a huge loss of ice, glaciers pulled
back for -miles-, waaay more than can be accounted for by seasonal changes.
I have spent hours reading about this and you are buying the global
warming Kool-aid but hey I'm not surprised.
Selective reading, no doubt. You should not take so much pride in your
selection bias.

I would say that was selective thinking on your part but it's obvious
you don't have a thought.

But, hey, that's OK. We here realize that you've never been one to let
facts get in your way.
Facts are data. Data by itself is useless. You have to understand what
you are looking at to draw conclusions.
In other words, you went on a data mining trip. GWB did that with Iraq
and he recanted later on. When can we expect your mea culpa?

He relied on faulty intelligence gathering and you have, as in only,
faulty intelligence. There is a difference.

You have not done this. Instead you have allowed other people to
draw conclusions for you because of some personal reason. That
reason could be that you are just plain lazy or it could be you are
to dull. Whatever the reason I suggest you apply a little more
personal effort on the topic instead of making the usual ignorant
post.

How goes your Obama BC conspiracy?

Seems to be moving right along on schedule as I predicted. How are the
voices in your head treating you today?

Right on schedule!?! There has to be some sort of 12-Step program near you!

JB

In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Billy Burpelson wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media
Institute"? What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What
scientific proof do they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
MNMikeW wrote:

Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.
Nothing to do with "shoot the messenger". Or lib. Or conservative.

It is a scientific topic and therefore a perfectly legitimate question
to ask what their scientific qualifications are.

It is always a good idea to assess and examine credentials or to see who
are the sponsors of a study.

Oh yeah, your credentials as a dumb ass Usenet poster boy are very
impressive.

And your credentials of pretending to be hot **** when you are nothing
more than cold **** in a Dixie cup are even more impressive!

On the other hand your credentials as an idiot are very impressive.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

John Barnard wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Billy Burpelson wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media
Institute"? What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What
scientific proof do they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
MNMikeW wrote:

Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.
Nothing to do with "shoot the messenger". Or lib. Or conservative.

It is a scientific topic and therefore a perfectly legitimate question
to ask what their scientific qualifications are.

It is always a good idea to assess and examine credentials or to see who
are the sponsors of a study.

Oh yeah, your credentials as a dumb ass Usenet poster boy are very
impressive.

And your credentials of pretending to be hot **** when you are nothing
more than cold **** in a Dixie cup are even more impressive!

Gee, that sounds a lot like what CanaDuh does: pretend to be hot **** when it is
nothing more than cold **** in a Dixie cup!

In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Billy Burpelson wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:

There has been no warming for last 10 years yet CO levels continue to
rise.
Billy Burpelson wrote:

Well, OK, no warming. If you say so...but then what would explain all
those glaciers and polar ice that is melting? Somebody used Photoshop
(tm) to doctor the hundreds of satellite and terrestrial pictures that
have been published over the last several years showing the melting?
ALL
those pictures are fraudulent?

Also, I think you meant C02 (carbon dioxide), not CO (carbon
monoxide).
Telamon wrote:

They melt every year in the summer time Billy. It's nothing new or
different. Can you guess what happens in the winter time? I'll bet you
can.
Yes indeed, there are seasonal changes. Congratulations on your
intuitive grasp of...the obvious.
I grew up on the east coast so I know about the seasons.

Unfortunately, if you had done even the tiniest bit of homework, you
would realize that there has been a huge loss of ice, glaciers pulled
back for -miles-, waaay more than can be accounted for by seasonal
changes.
I have spent hours reading about this and you are buying the global
warming Kool-aid but hey I'm not surprised.
Selective reading, no doubt. You should not take so much pride in your
selection bias.

I would say that was selective thinking on your part but it's obvious
you don't have a thought.

But, hey, that's OK. We here realize that you've never been one to let
facts get in your way.
Facts are data. Data by itself is useless. You have to understand what
you are looking at to draw conclusions.
In other words, you went on a data mining trip. GWB did that with Iraq
and he recanted later on. When can we expect your mea culpa?

He relied on faulty intelligence gathering and you have, as in only,
faulty intelligence. There is a difference.

You have not done this. Instead you have allowed other people to
draw conclusions for you because of some personal reason. That
reason could be that you are just plain lazy or it could be you are
to dull. Whatever the reason I suggest you apply a little more
personal effort on the topic instead of making the usual ignorant
post.

How goes your Obama BC conspiracy?

Seems to be moving right along on schedule as I predicted. How are the
voices in your head treating you today?

Right on schedule!?! There has to be some sort of 12-Step program near you!

I defer to your expertise on 12 step programs since you have been on
many for alcohol, crack, and PCP usage among others, which begs the
question of how you are doing on them. From here it doesn't look good.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

dxAce wrote:

John Barnard wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506084437.aspx
Well now, there's a reliable source: the "Business and Media Institute"?
What kind of *scientific* organization is that? What scientific proof do
they offer other than saying "it ain't so"?
Shoot the messenger when you have nothing. Typical lib.



The National Academy of Sciences agrees with Mann and not with the
"Business and Media Institute".

Are you guys in Mn ever going to get your other Senator?

Maybe as soon as you f00kin dumbass Canucks who thought you could tax your
way
to prosperity can get your excrement together in one sack!



I have no doubt that my standard of living is better than what you have!
After all, I don't need alcohol to blind me to reality!

The 12 step program work for the alcohol then. What about the other drug
abuse? Looks like that is still happening.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
John Barnard wrote:

dxAce wrote:

John Barnard wrote:

MNMikeW wrote:
"dave" wrote in message
...
MNMikeW wrote:

Sensor drift, google it.
Give it up. You are a tool of entrenched carbon industries.
Whereas you are just a tool.



Speaking of tools, I hope that you didn't donate to the Coleman campaign
using a credit card. Sorry SOB didn't let anyone know that their data
had been compromised. RIP - Coleman!

Never listen to dumbass Canucks, no matter what dey say!

Da dxAce never done steer no one wrong!



You go around in circles all the time! And that's the worst kind of
steering that exists!

This from a guy with one ore in the water? You must be dizzy from the
circles you make.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California