On 25/04/2021 19:52, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:52:41 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 22 Apr 2021 at 19:25:48 BST, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:32:42 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Â*On 21/04/2021 19:10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Â*Surely you must agree that people refusing to believe the earth goes
Â*round the sun for 100 years slowed down advances in physics?

Â*Not as much as simple minded people believing that it does...

Please don't post after 5 joints.

The Sun and the Earth orbit around their common centre of mass.

If you're OCD, otherwise "around the sun" is near enough.
Well no, that not nearly near enough., they all in fact orbit round te C
of G of the galaxy...oh noes, and that's is orbiting around...the c of G
of the unknown universe,

Or if you 'believe Einstein' nothing is orbiting anything, just rolling
around curved tracks made by bent space.

Its a shame you are so thick. There is an amazing world out there. possibly.

--
€œIdeas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 06:28:13 +0100, The Natural Idiot, another troll-feeding
senile asshole, blathered:


Well no, that not nearly near enough., they all in fact orbit round te C

Well, what I can see is that you miserable troll-feeding senile assholes on
Usenet orbit gladly around every stinking troll!

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

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:51:01 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


I do tend to have multiple social groups.

And, going by some accounts, you are obviously despised in each one of
those, **** the Git!

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:50:36 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


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

I do like that you keep confirming that you ARE a notorious sucker of troll
cock, you abnormal delusional bigmouth! BG

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 01:49:08 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:

How can something that does not exist have a gender?

How can you not remove his cock from your toothless senile gob, **** the
Git? You know, the unwashed Scot once was reported to be of the "smelly"
kind! Is THAT what makes him so irresistable to you?

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:25:44 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:20:18 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 21:54:22 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news 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.

He means that more than a couple of hundred years
ago, most of the science was done by the religious.
And some of them like Mendel made tremendous
advances in our scientific knowledge.

Until it conflicted with the teachings of the bible and was silenced.

That didn't happen very often at all, just with Bruno and Galileo.

They never did silence Darwin, just got a mega **** fight.

You're forgetting that with a large number of the population being
religious, science is slower to spread.

I'm not not really convinced about that. In fact you can make a
case that earlier than the last couple of centurys, it was mainly
the religious professionals who did advance most of the science
essentially because they had a lot of free time on their hands or
because the church chose to have some of their religious
professionals do that sort of thing like with the Vatican observatorys.

Just because it wasn't silenced, doesn't mean everyone will use it.

Yes, but the general public really doesn't get to use science that
much with evolution and the fundamentals of science like that.

There could have been improvements made on those discoveries, by people
who were too religious to believe in science.

One of the odder things is that there are a surprising number of
the religious who are stupid enough to not believe that evolution
is how it happened who still do real science in other scientific fields.

There's one example. Biology must have been hampered by the religious folk burying their head in the sand.

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 20:37:00 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 24, 2021 at 11:30:05 AM MST, ""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.

We can if it is a name.

By the way, I did look for UK specific examples of "can't". Here is what I
found:

https://youtu.be/dGnBi6giZw0

Those are examples from the UK. "Can't" is still pronounced as "can" (in many
cases).

I listened to the first guy and he clearly said carnt. Check your ears.

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:25:44 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:20:18 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 21:54:22 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news 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.

He means that more than a couple of hundred years
ago, most of the science was done by the religious.
And some of them like Mendel made tremendous
advances in our scientific knowledge.

Until it conflicted with the teachings of the bible and was silenced.

That didn't happen very often at all, just with Bruno and Galileo.

They never did silence Darwin, just got a mega **** fight.

You're forgetting that with a large number of the population being
religious, science is slower to spread.

I'm not not really convinced about that. In fact you can make a
case that earlier than the last couple of centurys, it was mainly
the religious professionals who did advance most of the science
essentially because they had a lot of free time on their hands or
because the church chose to have some of their religious
professionals do that sort of thing like with the Vatican observatorys.

Just because it wasn't silenced, doesn't mean everyone will use it.

Yes, but the general public really doesn't get to use science that
much with evolution and the fundamentals of science like that.

There could have been improvements made on those discoveries, by people
who were too religious to believe in science.

One of the odder things is that there are a surprising number of
the religious who are stupid enough to not believe that evolution
is how it happened who still do real science in other scientific fields.

There's one example. Biology must have been hampered by the religious
folk burying their head in the sand.

In fact it was dramatically advanced by Mendel who did have the time
to discover how plant breeding works, and with plenty of other
professionally
religious like CofE vicars with lots of time on their hands between sermons.

The roman catholics were more into ****ing the altar boys.

On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:06:00 +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 Apr 27, 2021 at 10:53:26 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 20:37:00 +0100, Snit wrote:

On Apr 24, 2021 at 11:30:05 AM MST, ""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.

We can if it is a name.

By the way, I did look for UK specific examples of "can't". Here is what I
found:

https://youtu.be/dGnBi6giZw0

Those are examples from the UK. "Can't" is still pronounced as "can" (in
many
cases).

I listened to the first guy and he clearly said carnt. Check your ears.

There is a slight r. Common in British English?

--
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 27, 2021 at 10:43:11 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:25:44 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:20:18 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 21:54:22 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news 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.

He means that more than a couple of hundred years
ago, most of the science was done by the religious.
And some of them like Mendel made tremendous
advances in our scientific knowledge.

Until it conflicted with the teachings of the bible and was silenced.

That didn't happen very often at all, just with Bruno and Galileo.

They never did silence Darwin, just got a mega **** fight.

You're forgetting that with a large number of the population being
religious, science is slower to spread.

I'm not not really convinced about that. In fact you can make a
case that earlier than the last couple of centurys, it was mainly
the religious professionals who did advance most of the science
essentially because they had a lot of free time on their hands or
because the church chose to have some of their religious
professionals do that sort of thing like with the Vatican observatorys.

Just because it wasn't silenced, doesn't mean everyone will use it.

Yes, but the general public really doesn't get to use science that
much with evolution and the fundamentals of science like that.

There could have been improvements made on those discoveries, by people
who were too religious to believe in science.

One of the odder things is that there are a surprising number of
the religious who are stupid enough to not believe that evolution
is how it happened who still do real science in other scientific fields.

There's one example. Biology must have been hampered by the religious folk
burying their head in the sand.

You talk about trusting your own experiences and intuitions over studies and
science.

So what about people who say they have a personal relationship with a god?

--
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 Tue, 27 Apr 2021 19:53:50 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


I listened to the first guy and he clearly said carnt. Check your ears.

There is a slight r. Common in British English?

There is a troll and a senile sucker of troll cock here, senile ****head!
LOL

"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Apr 27, 2021 at 10:43:11 AM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:25:44 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:20:18 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 21:54:22 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news 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.

He means that more than a couple of hundred years
ago, most of the science was done by the religious.
And some of them like Mendel made tremendous
advances in our scientific knowledge.

Until it conflicted with the teachings of the bible and was
silenced.

That didn't happen very often at all, just with Bruno and Galileo.

They never did silence Darwin, just got a mega **** fight.

You're forgetting that with a large number of the population being
religious, science is slower to spread.

I'm not not really convinced about that. In fact you can make a
case that earlier than the last couple of centurys, it was mainly
the religious professionals who did advance most of the science
essentially because they had a lot of free time on their hands or
because the church chose to have some of their religious
professionals do that sort of thing like with the Vatican observatorys.

Just because it wasn't silenced, doesn't mean everyone will use it.

Yes, but the general public really doesn't get to use science that
much with evolution and the fundamentals of science like that.

There could have been improvements made on those discoveries, by
people
who were too religious to believe in science.

One of the odder things is that there are a surprising number of
the religious who are stupid enough to not believe that evolution
is how it happened who still do real science in other scientific
fields.

There's one example. Biology must have been hampered by the religious
folk
burying their head in the sand.

You talk about trusting your own experiences and intuitions over studies
and
science.

So what about people who say they have a personal relationship with a god?

They are deluded. His personal experience with climate isnt.

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 20:04:56 GMT, **** the sick git, the notorious,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered again:


You talk about trusting your own experiences and intuitions over studies and
science.

HIS experience is that you keep sucking him off, EVERY time he sets out a
bait for you, you filthy senile sucker of troll cock!

On 04/27/2021 11:43 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
There's one example. Biology must have been hampered by the religious
folk burying their head in the sand.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_R._Miller

A real ostrich, that guy. It's more the fundamentalist Protestants who
prefer the sand box. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a well
organized document clearly stating this is what we believe, this is what
we don't believe, and whatever floats your boat. Creationism and the
young earth theories fit in the latter class. A Catholic can, if he
chooses, believe the earth is 6000 years old. He probably would be
considered a nutter but not a heretic.

Abortion, however, is in the not believe column. By extension embryonic
stem cell research is included although adult stem cell research is fine.

https://www.dw.com/en/researchers-in...ryo/a-57224980

That probably falls under the **** list. In any case there are already
too many humans with chimp characteristics.

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 20:15:33 -0600, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_R._Miller

A real ostrich, that guy.

You just made Birdbrain's day, senile whore! He now gets sucked off by TWO
toothless senile assholes simultaneously, **** the Git and lowbrowwoman!
****ing stupid senile assholes! LOL