Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Telamon wrote:
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. What do the voices in your head tell you about the next enthralling saga of Obama's BC? JB |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
John Barnard wrote: Telamon wrote: 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. What do the voices in your head tell you about the next enthralling saga of Obama's BC? No voices have programed me like they have you. You don't know what in blazes you are talking about that won't stop you. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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! |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
dxAce wrote: 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! Barnard is nothing but a hoser. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
dxAce wrote:
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! Cool! Someone let the other Polly out of its cage! JB |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
John Barnard wrote: dxAce wrote: 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! Cool! Someone let the other Polly out of its cage! Uncool - you. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
(OT) : For All the Global Warming Experts Out There - There Is Alt.Global-Warming ! | Shortwave | |||
( OT) Global Warming, no global scientific conspiracy | Shortwave | |||
A skeptic's take on man-made global warming | Shortwave |