On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:35:17 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:28:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 2021 at 10:38:16 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:28:16 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:09:40 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 11:00:16 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 03:44:18 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 7:14:23 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
:

On 04/15/2021 12:02 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last
word
in.
The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And
not
even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful
today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that
case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had
not
impeded
science.

Do you know who first formulated the Big Bang theory? Ever here
of
Gregor Mendel? Blaise Pascal?

Quite a few scientists manage to have a foot in both worlds. In
general
the Catholics seem more flexible than the Protestants,
particularly
the
'gimme that old time religion' branch.

In the past the two were heavily tied together... but that is no
longer the
case. There are still some religious scientists, but scientists
tend
to be
atheist at a higher level than the general public. They also
tend
to
be more
liberal, which makes sense given how at least in the US
conservatives
tend
to
reject our best evidence.

Scientists are liberal because they want funding for free.

Scientists are liberal because the conservative mindset is to deny
evidence.
We can see this with COVID,

No, we just don't make such a fuss over a small thing. A thing that
kills
4 times less than cancer and 40 times less than the world population
growth.

man-made global climate change,

It was 1C here in Scotland a few days ago, in spring. There is no
global
warming.

research on reduction of abortions,

That's not science, that's morals.

and in some cases even things like evolution.

Evolution could take place if we let coronavirus kill off the weak.

Nope, because it mostly kills those way past reproducing.

Irrelevant if it kills those or not. And they can hide indoors.

The point is we should let it kill off any younger folk that it can, as
they're the weaker ones.

As you call for these deaths wby don't you volunteer?

And he is significantly medically ****ed.

But doesnt reproduce.

Exactly, I would only reproduce if I was fit, healthy, rich, and good
looking. Imagine the next generation if everyone did that.

Didnt work with Phil the Greek, look at the useless ****s he produced.

That is not good looking. And the wife has to be all those things too obviously.

Set an example?

He does, but by streaking, quite literally.

How does that kill anyone?

That bit wasnt about killing anyone, although
in your case likely some died laughing or atleast
crashed the car or the motorbike etc.

Yes, a distraction at seeing my sexy body.

On Apr 25, 2021 at 11:46:00 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

Irrelevant if it kills those or not. And they can hide indoors.

The point is we should let it kill off any younger folk that it can, as
they're the weaker ones.

As you call for these deaths wby don't you volunteer? Set an example?

I am, by not wearing a mask.

Go get the disease.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 25, 2021 at 11:43:52 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

Grossly overreacting was therefore a trait that needed removing for the
next generation.

Nope because it means they do much better with the
non pandemic infections and don't have to bother to
wash their hands all the time and can get away with
doing what is more convenient like not throwing
away food that has had a fly walk on it etc etc etc.

Having a trait that makes you better at 9 things but worse at another,
getting you killed, is not a good trait to have. Say you could do
calculations twice as fast, you could sing perfect pitch, you could do 1000
pushups, but the sight of a car made you spontaneously combust. That would
not be a good thing to have. By your reasoning, you would be called
superior, and have a hired help to warn you of approaching cars.

You have no right to say who should not be saved.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 25, 2021 at 11:41:26 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:20:41 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:13:56 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:50:26 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:03 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:


...
Scientists are liberal because they want funding for free.

Scientists are liberal because the conservative mindset is to deny
evidence.
We can see this with COVID,

No, we just don't make such a fuss over a small thing. A thing that
kills 4
times less than cancer and 40 times less than the world population growth.

The idea that over half a million dead in America, and many more than that
around the world, and that is WITH some fairly significant precautions,
is a
"small thing" is an utter rejection of the facts.

It's 4 times smaller than cancer and 40 times smaller then the population
growth. Those are numbers, irrefutable numbers.

In the US it is the third leading cause of death. And that is with some
precautions. Your lack of compassion does not reduce the harm.

It's FOUR TIMES LESS. So 100 people die, but only 20 of them were
coronavirus. And that's assuming nobody died of anything other than the
virus or cancer.

It is still the third leading cause of death. Maybe even higher now. Again,
your lack of compassion is on you... a "bad trait" if you will.

And those without compassion are bad for society... so by your own standards
should you not be weeded out?



man-made global climate change,

It was 1C here in Scotland a few days ago, in spring. There is no global
warming.

Denial of the fact from you. That is what I mean.

I can see the temperature with my own eyes! It's on the thermometer over
there!

You use a local temperature to try to deny evidence of man-made global
climate
change. Your logic is flawed.

So magically my part of the world stays the same and the rest goes up?
Right.... Look, just move to the place that's the temperature you like, if
you're fussy enough to care about the alleged 2C change.

Selection bias is not a good way to look at climate. I say go with the
evidence. And moving does not reduce man-made global climate change, nor its
harm.


http://climate.nasa.gov

research on reduction of abortions,

That's not science, that's morals.

If you want to reduce abortions, which most conservatives claim to want,
there
are known methods to do it. At least in American the Republican party (the
more conservative of the two) rejects every one of these things. There
"solution" is to deny women equal rights.

The whole idea that an abortion is wrong is insanity. The child belongs to
the mother, and nobody else.

The Republican party pretends to be against abortion but then refused to do
anything to help reduce the numbers. The Democrats want it to be legal but
want to keep it rare.

Reducing the numbers can only mean you're taking away the right of choice
from the woman. I thought you liked human rights? The government should not
intervene.

I say increase the choice. Many who get an abortion would not have needed one
if they had more choices -- this is based on the evidence of better education,
free birth control, more access to Planned Parenthood and the like, etc.

and in some cases even things like evolution.

Evolution could take place if we let coronavirus kill off the weak.

Evolution IS taking place. And the more the virus spreads the more it
mutates
/ evolves.

I was obviously talking about the evolution of humans to fight it off.
Think
about Eskimos and the cold virus.

And we as a species have evolved the ability to make vaccines.

No, we've invented the ability to screw up our future evolution.

Evolution has no plan. It is not forward "thinking" -- it does not think at
all.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 00:03:02 +0100, rbowman wrote:

On 04/24/2021 12:30 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:01:42 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 22, 2021 at 3:16:17 AM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

I wonder why nobody ever says just "It's". For example:
John: "That engine's not running right."
Steve: "It's."

Language is weird. Heck, how do you think people generally
pronounce
the word
"can't".

Without the t. So it sounds more like "can".
https://youtu.be/6bszZZlvj4E

You bugger. Bet I will focus on that
bloody word every time its used now.

Just watched the first ep of the Manson tapes and didnt.

Corse that might just be because it is so ****ing bizarre.

I have caught it in some speech I hear.

Have a friend who insists it just cannot be true. I talk to her on
Zoom -- she
has agreed to let me record her without her knowing (at the time) and
then see
how SHE sounds). She insists she ALWAYS pronounced the T. Will be
interesting
to find out.

Yanks can't even pronounce herb with the H.

As in Herbert Marcuse? I had a kid's book that was in an Indian setting.
The medicine man was named Herb Gatherer but it took a while for my
epiphany that his first name wasn't Herbert.

I can't remember the title but I'm certain it would appall the modern
generation with its stereotyping and cultural appropriation. I thought
it was pretty neat and read it several times.

Stereotypes get there for a reason.

On Apr 25, 2021 at 11:57:58 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 00:03:02 +0100, rbowman wrote:

On 04/24/2021 12:30 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:01:42 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 22, 2021 at 3:16:17 AM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

I wonder why nobody ever says just "It's". For example:
John: "That engine's not running right."
Steve: "It's."

Language is weird. Heck, how do you think people generally
pronounce
the word
"can't".

Without the t. So it sounds more like "can".
https://youtu.be/6bszZZlvj4E

You bugger. Bet I will focus on that
bloody word every time its used now.

Just watched the first ep of the Manson tapes and didn=E2=80=99t.

Corse that might just be because it is so ****ing bizarre.

I have caught it in some speech I hear.

Have a friend who insists it just cannot be true. I talk to her on
Zoom -- she
has agreed to let me record her without her knowing (at the time) and
then see
how SHE sounds). She insists she ALWAYS pronounced the T. Will be
interesting
to find out.

Yanks can't even pronounce herb with the H.

As in Herbert Marcuse? I had a kid's book that was in an Indian setting.
The medicine man was named Herb Gatherer but it took a while for my
epiphany that his first name wasn't Herbert.

I can't remember the title but I'm certain it would appall the modern
generation with its stereotyping and cultural appropriation. I thought
it was pretty neat and read it several times.

Stereotypes get there for a reason.

Such as the stereotypes of libertarians?

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 18:47:48 GMT, **** the git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


Go get the disease.

Just watch that YOU won't get a disease from sucking the unwashed
Scottish ******'s cock all the time, **** the Git!

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 18:49:39 GMT, **** the git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


You have no right to say who should not be saved.

He, as a troll and clinically insane asshole, has the right to say ANYTHING,
you troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE!

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 19:14:27 GMT, **** the git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


Such as the stereotypes of libertarians?

Stereotypes by an attested clinically insane sociopath, you stereotypical
troll-feeding senile asshole!

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 18:52:51 GMT, **** the git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:



Evolution has no plan. It is not forward "thinking" -- it does not think at
all.

Let's face it: BOTH of you subnormal IDIOTS, he the troll and you the
troll-feeding senile asshole, are evolutionary dead-ends.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:28:34 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:24:27 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:28:16 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:09:40 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 11:00:16 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 03:44:18 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 7:14:23 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
:

On 04/15/2021 12:02 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last
word
in.
The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And
not
even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful
today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that
case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had
not
impeded
science.

Do you know who first formulated the Big Bang theory? Ever here
of
Gregor Mendel? Blaise Pascal?

Quite a few scientists manage to have a foot in both worlds. In
general
the Catholics seem more flexible than the Protestants,
particularly
the
'gimme that old time religion' branch.

In the past the two were heavily tied together... but that is no
longer the
case. There are still some religious scientists, but scientists
tend
to be
atheist at a higher level than the general public. They also
tend
to
be more
liberal, which makes sense given how at least in the US
conservatives
tend
to
reject our best evidence.

Scientists are liberal because they want funding for free.

Scientists are liberal because the conservative mindset is to deny
evidence.
We can see this with COVID,

No, we just don't make such a fuss over a small thing. A thing that
kills
4 times less than cancer and 40 times less than the world population
growth.

man-made global climate change,

It was 1C here in Scotland a few days ago, in spring. There is no
global
warming.

research on reduction of abortions,

That's not science, that's morals.

and in some cases even things like evolution.

Evolution could take place if we let coronavirus kill off the weak.

Nope, because it mostly kills those way past reproducing.

Irrelevant if it kills those or not. And they can hide indoors.

The point is we should let it kill off any younger folk that it can,
as
they're the weaker ones.

In fact there isnt any evidence that it does kill of the weaker ones.

The Spanish Flu didn't, in fact it killed off the stronger ones
because their much better immune system grossly over reacted
and it was the cytokine storm that killed them very quickly.

Grossly overreacting was therefore a trait that needed removing for the
next generation.

Nope because it means they do much better with the
non pandemic infections and don't have to bother to
wash their hands all the time and can get away with
doing what is more convenient like not throwing
away food that has had a fly walk on it etc etc etc.

Having a trait that makes you better at 9 things but worse at another,
getting you killed, is not a good trait to have.

Depends on the death rate. In fact we evolved like that with
kids sure that nothing can kill them and in fact that works fine.

Say you could do calculations twice as fast, you could sing perfect pitch,
you could do 1000 pushups, but the sight of a car made you spontaneously
combust. That would not be a good thing to have.

Yes but we never have evolved to have the sight of a car
make you spontaneously combust for some odd reason.

By your reasoning, you would be called superior, and have a hired help to
warn you of approaching cars.

But isnt reality.

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 06:34:37 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather

--
Another typical retarded "conversation" between the two resident idiots:

Birdbrain: "But imagine how cool it was to own slaves."

Senile Rodent: "Yeah, right. Feed them, clothe them, and fix them when
they're broken.
After all, you paid good money for them. Then you've got to keep an eye
on them all the time."

Birdbrain: "Better than having to give them wages on top of that."

Senile Rodent: "Specially when they make more slaves for you
and produce their own food and clothes."

MID:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:20:41 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:13:56 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:50:26 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:03 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:


...
Scientists are liberal because they want funding for free.

Scientists are liberal because the conservative mindset is to deny
evidence.
We can see this with COVID,

No, we just don't make such a fuss over a small thing. A thing that
kills 4
times less than cancer and 40 times less than the world population
growth.

The idea that over half a million dead in America, and many more than
that
around the world, and that is WITH some fairly significant
precautions, is a
"small thing" is an utter rejection of the facts.

It's 4 times smaller than cancer and 40 times smaller then the
population
growth. Those are numbers, irrefutable numbers.

In the US it is the third leading cause of death. And that is with some
precautions. Your lack of compassion does not reduce the harm.

It's FOUR TIMES LESS. So 100 people die, but only 20 of them were
coronavirus. And that's assuming nobody died of anything other than the
virus or cancer.

man-made global climate change,

It was 1C here in Scotland a few days ago, in spring. There is no
global
warming.

Denial of the fact from you. That is what I mean.

I can see the temperature with my own eyes! It's on the thermometer
over
there!

You use a local temperature to try to deny evidence of man-made global
climate
change. Your logic is flawed.

So magically my part of the world stays the same and the rest goes up?
Right.... Look, just move to the place that's the temperature you like,
if you're fussy enough to care about the alleged 2C change.

http://climate.nasa.gov

research on reduction of abortions,

That's not science, that's morals.

If you want to reduce abortions, which most conservatives claim to
want,
there
are known methods to do it. At least in American the Republican party
(the
more conservative of the two) rejects every one of these things. There
"solution" is to deny women equal rights.

The whole idea that an abortion is wrong is insanity. The child belongs
to
the mother, and nobody else.

The Republican party pretends to be against abortion but then refused to
do
anything to help reduce the numbers. The Democrats want it to be legal
but
want to keep it rare.

Reducing the numbers can only mean you're taking away the right of choice
from the woman. I thought you liked human rights? The government should
not intervene.

and in some cases even things like evolution.

Evolution could take place if we let coronavirus kill off the weak.

Evolution IS taking place. And the more the virus spreads the more it
mutates
/ evolves.

I was obviously talking about the evolution of humans to fight it off.
Think
about Eskimos and the cold virus.

And we as a species have evolved the ability to make vaccines.

No,

Fraid so.

we've invented the ability to screw up our future evolution.

No we havent. Making useful vaccines has in
fact allowed us to evolve even smarter people,
most obviously with the spanish flu which killed
the best people very quickly indeed.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:35:17 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:28:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 2021 at 10:38:16 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:28:16 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:09:40 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 11:00:16 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 03:44:18 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 7:14:23 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
:

On 04/15/2021 12:02 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last
word
in.
The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word
"damn".
And
not
even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather
is
awful
today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter
for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that
case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion
had
not
impeded
science.

Do you know who first formulated the Big Bang theory? Ever
here
of
Gregor Mendel? Blaise Pascal?

Quite a few scientists manage to have a foot in both worlds.
In
general
the Catholics seem more flexible than the Protestants,
particularly
the
'gimme that old time religion' branch.

In the past the two were heavily tied together... but that is
no
longer the
case. There are still some religious scientists, but
scientists
tend
to be
atheist at a higher level than the general public. They also
tend
to
be more
liberal, which makes sense given how at least in the US
conservatives
tend
to
reject our best evidence.

Scientists are liberal because they want funding for free.

Scientists are liberal because the conservative mindset is to
deny
evidence.
We can see this with COVID,

No, we just don't make such a fuss over a small thing. A thing
that
kills
4 times less than cancer and 40 times less than the world
population
growth.

man-made global climate change,

It was 1C here in Scotland a few days ago, in spring. There is no
global
warming.

research on reduction of abortions,

That's not science, that's morals.

and in some cases even things like evolution.

Evolution could take place if we let coronavirus kill off the
weak.

Nope, because it mostly kills those way past reproducing.

Irrelevant if it kills those or not. And they can hide indoors.

The point is we should let it kill off any younger folk that it can,
as
they're the weaker ones.

As you call for these deaths wby don't you volunteer?

And he is significantly medically ****ed.

But doesnt reproduce.

Exactly, I would only reproduce if I was fit, healthy, rich, and good
looking. Imagine the next generation if everyone did that.

Didnt work with Phil the Greek, look at the useless ****s he produced.

That is not good looking.

Most women would disagree with you about that.

And the wife has to be all those things too obviously.

Nope, it doesnt work like that. Liz's mum was never anything special.

Set an example?

He does, but by streaking, quite literally.

How does that kill anyone?

That bit wasnt about killing anyone, although
in your case likely some died laughing or atleast
crashed the car or the motorbike etc.

Yes, a distraction at seeing my sexy body.

Laughing at your microdick, actually.

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 06:41:46 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather

--
Another typical retarded "conversation" between Birdbrain and senile Rodent:

Senile Rodent: " Did you ever dig a hole to bury your own ****?"

Birdbrain: "I do if there's no flush toilet around."

Senile Rodent: "Yeah, I prefer camping like that, off by myself with
no dunnys around and have always buried the ****."

MID:

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 06:37:00 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather

--
Typical retarded "conversation" between the Scottish ****** and the senile
Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "Horse **** doesn't stink."

Senile Rodent: "It does if you roll in it."

Birdbrain: "I've never worked out why, I assumed it was maybe meateaters
that made stinky ****, but then why does vegetarian human **** stink? Is it
just the fact that we're capable of digesting meat?"

Senile Rodent: "Nope, some cow **** stinks too."

Message-ID:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:21:18 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:11:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:56:53 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last word in. The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn". And not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is awful today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had not impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

You have been shown evidence. Your acceptance or rejection of the evidence
is
on you.

Religion did not help science. Just because some scientists were religious
means nothing. If there had been no religion, those same people would still
have become scientists.

It was not just that they were religious, they were doing research in the
name
of religion. Why do you think there is a Vatican Observatory? How about the
Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences? And Islam-backed work, getting
much from the Greeks, pushed a lot in the areas of mathematics, optics,
astronomy, and medicine. Many early scientists saw studying the world as a
form of studying their idea of a deity.

Yeah and when that science they were doing produces something against the
bible it's immediately discounted.

In far too many cases, agreed.



But look at you, now, you reject both religion AND much of science.
Meanwhile
I am not religious but very much look to science.

I do not reject science.

You reject man-made global climate change and other well established things
shown though peer review research.

I reject that it's made enough difference to need to give a damn.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:07:36 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:51:58 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:02:12 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 20, 2021 at 11:20:45 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 05:23:56 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 9:01:57 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote

What matters is the evidence with science, not individuals.

Correct: though the experts will generally side with the evidence
(if they did not they would not be the experts!)

Problem is that the evidence changes, particularly with the
recent less than predicted rate of world temperature change.

Do you mean the hand picked specific areas where it was less even as
the world beat the predictions?

Nope, the world as a whole didn=E2=80=99t beat predictions.

Would love to see the peer reviewed research you are referring to.

You're the one that needs to provide that
given you claim it exceeded predictions.

You have no research to back your claims, nor scientific sites. OK. That
is
what I figured.

You have no research

Countered by the evidence provided.

If you want to have a conversation, fine, but I am not interested in you
making insane claims you cannot back and then ignoring the fact evidence
has
been provided. If you ACTUALLY want to learn about man-made global climate
change this is a good place to start:

http://climate.nasa.gov

A government website is the last place to go for facts.

Do you have a more reputable site to get info on man-made global climate
change? if so please share.

Looking out of my window.

A simple "no" would have done. You have an unsupported intuition.

It was a yes. First hand information, supported by everyone else who has looked out of their window, or had to clear snow off their car.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:09:55 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:25 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 05:54:57 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 20, 2021 at 8:47:23 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

What you snipped:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I look to peer reviewed papers (and not just hand picking but a wide
range if I am interested in a topic), scientific sites, fact checkers, top
experts and organizations, etc.

You find this to be a bad thing and say that ties me to a cult. We do not
see
eye-to-eye. So what?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sad your frustration at not being able to answer this question led you to
lash
out so immaturely.

I hope you do better next time.

If you wanted to say god existed, you could come up with "evidence" for that
too.

Well, god does exist -- as a concept (or set of concepts).

So he doesn't then. Things don't exist because you want them to.

Doesn't mean he exists.

Can you point to the peer reviewed papers that back the idea of a deity?
Scientific sites? Fact checkers?

Why would there be any, since he doesn't exist.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:10:51 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:52:56 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 22:20:13 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 20, 2021 at 1:03:55 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 20, 2021 at 11:20:45 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 05:23:56 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 9:01:57 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote

What matters is the evidence with science, not
individuals.

Correct: though the experts will generally side with the
evidence
(if they did not they would not be the experts!)

Problem is that the evidence changes, particularly with the
recent less than predicted rate of world temperature
change.

Do you mean the hand picked specific areas where it was less
even as
the world beat the predictions?

Nope, the world as a whole didn=E2=80=99t beat predictions.

Would love to see the peer reviewed research you are referring
to.

You're the one that needs to provide that
given you claim it exceeded predictions.

You have no research to back your claims, nor scientific sites.
OK. That
is
what I figured.

You have no research

Countered by the evidence provided.

If you want to have a conversation, fine, but I am not interested in
you
making insane claims you cannot back and then ignoring the fact
evidence has
been provided. If you ACTUALLY want to learn about man-made global
climate
change this is a good place to start:

http://climate.nasa.gov

A government website is the last place to go for facts.

Do you have a more reputable site to get info on man-made global
climate
change? if so please share.

It isnt about reputable, its about the evidence presented with science.

Peer reviewed studies.

Reviewed by other MMCC cult members...

A cult, yes that's a good way of describing it. Or perhaps a religion.
"This must be so, so let's find ways to "prove" it".

If one can disprove a going top theory one gets lots of recognition in
science. Does not mean there is no friction to stop such, but overall look at
the famous scientists -- each and every one proposed new ways to see things.

Plenty scientists were showing it was false, but they are now overwhelmed by the sheep who believe in it, so are ignored and have given up bothering to educate them.

Anyway.... there's no point in trying to stop it if you think it exists. We will use all the fossil fuels one day, that ain't stopping.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:00:20 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 19:44:53 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:34:32 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last word
in.
The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And
not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful
today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had not
impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

Its true anyway.

Religion did not help science.

Yes it did, if only because a lot of the professionally religious
had a lot time on their hands that allowed them to do science.

Just because some scientists were religious means nothing.

In earlier times it was in fact almost all of them.

If there had been no religion, those same people would still have
become
scientists.

Nope, they wouldn't have been in religious institutions with
a lot of time on their hands as parasites on the community.

Mendel would have had to get off his lard arse and earn a living.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor...ife_and_career

Inventing things is a living.

He would have got the same food and accommodation
if he had just grovelled to some god or other instead
of doing something useful.

Einstein managed to earn money as a patent clerk, and invent ****.

He didn't actually invent anything much when he was a patent
clerk

Didn't have to, that earned him enough money to go invent later.

and was stupid enough to believe in some god too.

I doubt his religion played any part in creating his theories.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:08:55 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:05:23 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

Tedious, isn't he?

What Rod Speed ran from:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I look to peer reviewed papers (and not just hand picking but a wide
range if I am interested in a topic), scientific sites, fact checkers, top
experts and organizations, etc.

You find this to be a bad thing and say that ties me to a cult. We do not see
eye-to-eye. So what?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I find it amusing how offended some are by that.

No, he just got bored of you repeating yourself ad nauseum.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:03:53 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:05:23 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

Tedious, isn't he?

What Rod Speed ran from:

More of you lies, that troll**** is what I flushed, repeatedly.

Snit is what's called a floater.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:00:20 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 19:44:53 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:34:32 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last word
in.
The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And
not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful
today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had
not
impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

Its true anyway.

Religion did not help science.

Yes it did, if only because a lot of the professionally religious
had a lot time on their hands that allowed them to do science.

Just because some scientists were religious means nothing.

In earlier times it was in fact almost all of them.

If there had been no religion, those same people would still have
become
scientists.

Nope, they wouldn't have been in religious institutions with
a lot of time on their hands as parasites on the community.

Mendel would have had to get off his lard arse and earn a living.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor...ife_and_career

Inventing things is a living.

He would have got the same food and accommodation
if he had just grovelled to some god or other instead
of doing something useful.

Einstein managed to earn money as a patent clerk, and invent ****.

He didn't actually invent anything much when he was a patent
clerk

Didn't have to, that earned him enough money to go invent later.

That utterly mangles what actually happened.
He didn't save up what the patent office payed
him and did the inventing with that money.

and was stupid enough to believe in some god too.

I doubt his religion played any part in creating his theories.

It did actually. He ran that stupid line 'god does not play dice with the
universe'

Pity about radioactive decay alone.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:03:53 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:05:23 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

Tedious, isn't he?

What Rod Speed ran from:

More of you lies, that troll**** is what I flushed, repeatedly.

Snit is what's called a floater.

Which one of these ?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/floater

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:22:29 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather

--
TYPICAL retarded "conversation" between sociopath Rodent and sociopath
Birdbrain from August 26th 2018:

Birdbrain: "I have one head but 5 fingers."

Senile Rodent: "Obvious lie. You hairy legged cross dressers are so inbred
that you all have two heads."

Birdbrain: "You're the one that likes hairy legs remember?"

Senile Rodent: "The problem isnt the hairy legs, it's the gross inbreeding
that
produces two headed unemployables like you."

Birdbrain: "So why did you mention hairy legs?"

Senile Rodent: "Because that's what those who arent actually stupid enough
to shave their legs have."

Birdbrain: "You only have hairy legs if both of the following are true:
1) You're quite far back on the evolutionary scale.
2) You haven't learned what a razor is for."

Senile Rodent: "Only a terminal ****wit or a woman shaves their legs."

Birdbrain: "There is literally zero point in having hair all over your
body."

Senile Rodent: "There is even less point in wasting your time changing what
you are born with."

MID:

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:25:54 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the two subnormal sociopathic cretins' endless absolutely idiotic
blather

--
Typical retarded "conversation" between the Scottish ****** and the senile
Ozzietard:

Birdbrain: "Horse **** doesn't stink."

Senile Rodent: "It does if you roll in it."

Birdbrain: "I've never worked out why, I assumed it was maybe meateaters
that made stinky ****, but then why does vegetarian human **** stink? Is it
just the fact that we're capable of digesting meat?"

Senile Rodent: "Nope, some cow **** stinks too."

Message-ID:

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:41:23 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:21:18 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:11:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:56:53 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last word in. The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had not impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

You have been shown evidence. Your acceptance or rejection of the evidence
is
on you.

Religion did not help science. Just because some scientists were religious
means nothing. If there had been no religion, those same people would
still
have become scientists.

It was not just that they were religious, they were doing research in the
name
of religion. Why do you think there is a Vatican Observatory? How about the
Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences? And Islam-backed work,
getting
much from the Greeks, pushed a lot in the areas of mathematics, optics,
astronomy, and medicine. Many early scientists saw studying the world as a
form of studying their idea of a deity.

Yeah and when that science they were doing produces something against the
bible it's immediately discounted.

In far too many cases, agreed.



But look at you, now, you reject both religion AND much of science.
Meanwhile
I am not religious but very much look to science.

I do not reject science.

You reject man-made global climate change and other well established things
shown though peer review research.

I reject that it's made enough difference to need to give a damn.

I understand you reject the evidence. Not sure what else there is to say about
that.

You mock others for their religious as being faith based but you have your own
equally strong faith based views.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:41:23 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:21:18 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:11:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:56:53 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit

wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last
word in. The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word
"damn". And not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather
is
awful today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter
for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that
case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had
not impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

You have been shown evidence. Your acceptance or rejection of the
evidence
is
on you.

Religion did not help science. Just because some scientists were
religious
means nothing. If there had been no religion, those same people
would
still
have become scientists.

It was not just that they were religious, they were doing research
in the
name
of religion. Why do you think there is a Vatican Observatory? How
about the
Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences? And Islam-backed work,
getting
much from the Greeks, pushed a lot in the areas of mathematics,
optics,
astronomy, and medicine. Many early scientists saw studying the
world as a
form of studying their idea of a deity.

Yeah and when that science they were doing produces something against
the
bible it's immediately discounted.

In far too many cases, agreed.



But look at you, now, you reject both religion AND much of science.
Meanwhile
I am not religious but very much look to science.

I do not reject science.

You reject man-made global climate change and other well established
things
shown though peer review research.

I reject that it's made enough difference to need to give a damn.

I understand you reject the evidence. Not sure what else there is to say
about
that.

You mock others for their religious as being faith based but you have your
own
equally strong faith based views.

Bull****. He actually realises that climate has not changed enough to
matter.

On 04/26/2021 11:53 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
I doubt his religion played any part in creating his theories.

In a way it did. He fervently believed in a steady state universe and
created a 'cosmological constant' (fudge factor) to make his equations work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant

I don't know if his belief derived from Judaism but it was strong enough
to ignore what his math was telling him.

"Einstein reportedly referred to his failure to accept the validation of
his equations€”when they had predicted the expansion of the universe in
theory, before it was demonstrated in observation of the cosmological
redshift€”as his "biggest blunder"

A Catholic priest called him on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

"At this time, Einstein, while not taking exception to the mathematics
of Lemaître's theory, refused to accept that the universe was expanding;
Lemaître recalled his commenting "Vos calculs sont corrects, mais votre
physique est abominable" ("Your calculations are correct, but your
physics is atrocious")"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

Kuhn wrote a book about the phenomenon but Planck summed it up:

"a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and
making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually
die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."[

On 2021-04-26 6:01 p.m., Snit wrote:
On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:41:23 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:21:18 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 21, 2021 at 11:11:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 23:56:53 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 17, 2021 at 10:28:50 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:10:05 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 10:59:28 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 21:15:17 +0100, Snit
wrote:

On Apr 15, 2021 at 11:02:15 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:12:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote

Another account must be made so they don't get the last word in. The
silliest thing I got banned for was saying the word "damn".
And not even
in a rude way, probably something like "the damn weather is
awful today".
Turns out the admin was a religious nutter.

Yeah, I got the same thing from another religious nutter for
using the term "hell of a lot", not a moderator in that case.

You have to wonder how far we would be today if religion had not impeded
science.

Until a few hundred years ago there was not much of a split.

In English please.

The two have a history that is tied together.

I doubt it.

You have been shown evidence. Your acceptance or rejection of the evidence
is
on you.

Religion did not help science. Just because some scientists were religious
means nothing. If there had been no religion, those same people would
still
have become scientists.

It was not just that they were religious, they were doing research in the
name
of religion. Why do you think there is a Vatican Observatory? How about the
Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences? And Islam-backed work,
getting
much from the Greeks, pushed a lot in the areas of mathematics, optics,
astronomy, and medicine. Many early scientists saw studying the world as a
form of studying their idea of a deity.

Yeah and when that science they were doing produces something against the
bible it's immediately discounted.

In far too many cases, agreed.



But look at you, now, you reject both religion AND much of science.
Meanwhile
I am not religious but very much look to science.

I do not reject science.

You reject man-made global climate change and other well established things
shown though peer review research.

I reject that it's made enough difference to need to give a damn.

I understand you reject the evidence. Not sure what else there is to say about
that.

You mock others for their religious as being faith based but you have your own
equally strong faith based views.

they tried to snit you but i said no

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:50:44 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:07:36 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:51:58 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:02:12 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 20, 2021 at 11:20:45 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 05:23:56 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 16, 2021 at 9:01:57 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote

What matters is the evidence with science, not individuals.

Correct: though the experts will generally side with the evidence
(if they did not they would not be the experts!)

Problem is that the evidence changes, particularly with the
recent less than predicted rate of world temperature change.

Do you mean the hand picked specific areas where it was less even as
the world beat the predictions?

Nope, the world as a whole didn=E2=80=99t beat predictions.

Would love to see the peer reviewed research you are referring to.

You're the one that needs to provide that
given you claim it exceeded predictions.

You have no research to back your claims, nor scientific sites. OK. That
is
what I figured.

You have no research

Countered by the evidence provided.

If you want to have a conversation, fine, but I am not interested in you
making insane claims you cannot back and then ignoring the fact evidence
has
been provided. If you ACTUALLY want to learn about man-made global climate
change this is a good place to start:

http://climate.nasa.gov

A government website is the last place to go for facts.

Do you have a more reputable site to get info on man-made global climate
change? if so please share.

Looking out of my window.

A simple "no" would have done. You have an unsupported intuition.

It was a yes. First hand information, supported by everyone else who has
looked out of their window, or had to clear snow off their car.

You have an intuition, contrary to the evidence, based on limited data.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:51:30 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:09:55 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:25 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 05:54:57 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 20, 2021 at 8:47:23 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

What you snipped:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I look to peer reviewed papers (and not just hand picking but a wide
range if I am interested in a topic), scientific sites, fact checkers, top
experts and organizations, etc.

You find this to be a bad thing and say that ties me to a cult. We do not
see
eye-to-eye. So what?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sad your frustration at not being able to answer this question led you to
lash
out so immaturely.

I hope you do better next time.

If you wanted to say god existed, you could come up with "evidence" for that
too.

Well, god does exist -- as a concept (or set of concepts).

So he doesn't then. Things don't exist because you want them to.

How can something that does not exist have a gender?


Doesn't mean he exists.

Can you point to the peer reviewed papers that back the idea of a deity?
Scientific sites? Fact checkers?

Why would there be any, since he doesn't exist.

I agree -- but I do know there are many concepts of gods.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:53:03 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

It isnt about reputable, its about the evidence presented with science.

Peer reviewed studies.

Reviewed by other MMCC cult members...

A cult, yes that's a good way of describing it. Or perhaps a religion.
"This must be so, so let's find ways to "prove" it".

If one can disprove a going top theory one gets lots of recognition in
science. Does not mean there is no friction to stop such, but overall look
at
the famous scientists -- each and every one proposed new ways to see
things.

Plenty scientists were showing it was false, but they are now overwhelmed by
the sheep who believe in it, so are ignored and have given up bothering to
educate them.

Happy to see the peer reviewed articles which denounce it you are referring
to.



Anyway.... there's no point in trying to stop it if you think it exists. We
will use all the fossil fuels one day, that ain't stopping.


--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:54:42 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:08:55 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:05:23 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

Tedious, isn't he?

What Rod Speed ran from:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I look to peer reviewed papers (and not just hand picking but a wide
range if I am interested in a topic), scientific sites, fact checkers, top
experts and organizations, etc.

You find this to be a bad thing and say that ties me to a cult. We do not
see
eye-to-eye. So what?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I find it amusing how offended some are by that.

No, he just got bored of you repeating yourself ad nauseum.

I do like how those who troll get so bent out of shape. So often the same
pattern:

1) They make a claim.
2) There is a response they do not like.

They go back to 1. Carroll and Gremlin are masters at this.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Apr 26, 2021 at 10:54:59 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:03:53 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 23, 2021 at 10:54:38 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 06:05:23 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Some gutless ****wit troll desperately cowering behind
"Snit" repetitively ****ted
the same mindless troll**** and lies as it always does when
its got done like a ****ing dinner, as it always is.

Tedious, isn't he?

What Rod Speed ran from:

More of you lies, that troll**** is what I flushed, repeatedly.

Snit is what's called a floater.

I do tend to have multiple social groups.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 19:30:26 -0600, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


In a way it did. He fervently believed in

YOU fervently keep sucking troll cock on Usenet, you disgusting, senile,
endlessly gossiping bigmouth!

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:01:46 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


I understand you reject the evidence.

What you don't understand is that it's evident that you gladly keep sucking
off the unwashed Scottish ******'s cock, you ****ed up senile sucker of
troll cock!

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:49:44 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


Happy to see

HE is happy to see that you REALLY can't resist his unwashed Scottish cock,
**** the Git! BG

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:48:15 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


You have an intuition, contrary to the evidence, based on limited data.

His intuition tells him how to make you suck him off every time he wants to
be sucked off by a senile asshole like you, **** the Git! BG