The "Consensus" is being questioned...

Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder

"Well no. My comment was not directed at Woody. I'm not surprised that you misinterpreted what you read, however.


>>I'm not surprised that you misinterpreted what you read, however.<<

Certainly, Dabob2 and SPP misinterpreted everything that's been written, which is not unusual."


You're losing your touch, boys. That was unmitigated sarcasm. Dabob got it, you guys, apparently not so much.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<That was unmitigated sarcasm.>

Of course. You'd better keep your day job; you're no Doug Piranha.

 

Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder

So apparently your self imposed exile is over?

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<So apparently your self imposed exile is over?>

My hiatus from WE is over, but I'm only back in limited form. I'm not going to bother debating certain posters because that has proven pointless. Mostly I'm planning on heckling from the balcony.

 

Originally Posted By ecdc

>>Mostly I'm planning on heckling from the balcony.<<

How mature of you. You routinely get shown up by other posters who know their stuff more than you, so you just morph into troll-like status.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<You routinely get shown up by other posters who know their stuff more than you, so you just morph into troll-like status.>

I'm routinely insulted by the clueless, who distort my arguments and ignore my evidence, so I've decided not to engage them.

 

Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder

When does that start?

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

>>I'm not surprised that you misinterpreted what you read, however.<<

<Certainly, Dabob2 and SPP misinterpreted everything that's been written, which is not unusual.>

Again, SPP's comment was sarcastic. Try to keep up.

>>But the time scales ALONE mean you can't extrapolate from then to today, Einstein. Geez, it's like explaining something to a particularly obtuse and petulant teenager who thinks he knows everything<<

<That's an argument against the article. Go ahead and call the scientist an idiot. I'm sure you feel satisfaction from that!!!>

What? It's not an argument against the article. Talk about misinterpreting what's being written. Of course you've done that ever since you posted the article.

And it's not the scientist I'm calling an idiot. Only someone who would read what he said, and not understand that the difference in the time scale alone would be enough to make the two eras completely different would qualify for that term.

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

I have been a staunch GOP'er for .. Oh I dunno' maybe 25 years now.

My political affiliation is relevant to my point, but I won't take the time to say why. If it ain't obvious...nevermind.




It's January 15, 2008 in Atlanta. It was 72 F last week and our drinking water is running out. We are in record drought. I love Autumn, except around here Autumn never ended. Winter has been extremely mild. Last summer we had record highs and it stayed hot as hell.

I'm starting to scratch my chin on this global warming thing. Perhaps all of us who lean so far Left or Right that we stop thinking for ourselves, need to occassionally say "what if" now and then.

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

>>My hiatus from WE is over<<

Translation: "I took my ball and ran home after being tripped up by my own faulty logic and bling GOP loyalty again and again, but now I'm back purely to make personal attacks."

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

bling or blind, same effect...

 

Originally Posted By DAR

Some have bling bling loyalty.

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

often the bling makes one blind.

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

lack of bling can do the same

ultimately, most things are driven by self serving agendas

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that bling.
Doo wop doo wop doo wop be bop kachow!

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<Translation: "I took my ball and ran home after being tripped up by my own faulty logic and bling GOP loyalty again and again, but now I'm back purely to make personal attacks.">

No, evidently to respond to them.

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

How do you use a personal attack to criticize someone for making personal attacks? That's stupid. Ya'll are stupid for making personal attacks.

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

WE is stupid.

I'm going back to the islands, where the shrimp boats tie up the vines. Gimmie oysters and bear, for dinner every day of the year, it makes me feel fine, I feel fine. I want to be there. I want to go down and get high by the sea there. With a tin cup for a challice, fill it up with red wine, and I'll be chewing on a honeysuckle vine.

~~~~

 

Originally Posted By DVC_dad

^ ^ ^ Thats me chewing on a vine ya'll.

 

Originally Posted By woody

>>Again, SPP's comment was sarcastic. Try to keep up.<<

Try to mean what you say. If it was sarcastic, then he has poor use of language to convey it. Certainly, he hasn't learned how to write a good joke.

>>And it's not the scientist I'm calling an idiot. Only someone who would read what he said, and not understand that the difference in the time scale alone would be enough to make the two eras completely different would qualify for that term.<<

Of course, the scientist never argued that the time scale disqualifies his study in application to today. That is still to be further analyzed. Only you would completely misinterpret his comment to mean "fundamentally different" than what he intented.

The article is consistent from beginning to end. You're inconsistent and full of nonsense.