Horvath lied

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Whorebath said:
>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.

Not according to the home page of their climatology department.

http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/


Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
crap:

I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and
there was no climatology department. This is easily verifiable. There
is a search engine in the upper right corner, (easily verifiable.) I
put in "climatology," (easily verifiable.) I got back, "No Match
Found." Where am I lying?

BTW, it's too bad you didn't actually go to that URL. It's not the
homepage for their climatology department. It's only news on
atmosphere, oceans, and climate. BOO-Yah!



This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Wrong again. I guess you missed this at the head of the page:

The Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate spans a broad program
of education and research in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and
Planetary Science at MIT

Does the word "program" strike a bell.

Boo Yah up your ass again.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:30:56 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this

I guess you didn't notice that, "climate," and, "climatology," are two
different things. Perhaps you've been having too many mixology
classes?

BOO-Yah! AGAIN!

[bkn...@conramp.net]

You're a fool and obviously enjoy proving it.

[BobM]

Whorebath, you are trying too hard to sound informed.

.

[golfbum18]

On May 24, 2:55 pm, BobM <defangedandneute...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Whorebath, you are trying too hard to sound informed.
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, May 24, 2013 11:09:37 AM UTC-7, Horva...@net.net wrote:

> > On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:30:56 -0500, bkni...@conramp.net wrote this
>
> > crap:
>
> > >On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:26:11 -0400, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>
>>
> > >>>Whorebath said:
>

>

.

>
>Whorebath, you are trying too hard to sound informed.

Which he should know by now, is an impossible task.

[BAR]

In article <ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...

There is a term for people like you and some others of your age around here and it is prissy
little bitches. Or, you could be called a teacher's pet. Or, the bully's side kick.

Yale has a class in animal fucking. http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4646

My wife has degrees in geology and chemistry, she could call herself a climatoligist.

[BAR]

In article <kq8vp89seuhjtc5sh...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...

http://search.mit.edu/search?
client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=mithome&num=15
&submit=Search&as_q=climatology

Just a bunch of papers, no degrees, no departments.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:21:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:

>In article <ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
>>
>> Whorebath said:
>> >According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>>
>> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>>
>> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>>
>>
>> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>
>There is a term for people like you and some others of your age around here and it is prissy
>little bitches. Or, you could be called a teacher's pet. Or, the bully's side kick.

There's a term for people like you and teenagers. Stupid.

>
>Yale has a class in animal fucking. http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4646

Case in point. What does
"On Saturday afternoon, Yale hosted a �sensitivity training� in which
students were asked to consider topics such as bestiality, incest, and
accepting money for sex".

have to do with this thread?

>
>My wife has degrees in geology and chemistry, she could call herself a climatoligist.

No, she couldn't. However, you have now lowered yourself to Whorebath
just to try and throw a barb.

You never learn.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Climatology is taught at MIT. Keep on being a junior Whorebath, it
becomes you. LOLOL

[Don Kirkman]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:21:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:

Climatology has nothing to do with the earth sciences or the
combination of atoms and molecules into various substances. Is there
no end to your buffoonery? You wife is not only better educated than
you, she has principles.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

[Moderate]

bkn...@conramp.net Wrote in message:

You started a thead to call someone a lair? Now that is low
level. You are a serial liar.
--

[bkn...@conramp.net]

I thought that there would be only one idiot that might make something
of Whorebath's stupidity.

I was wrong...two. Welcome in Bert's clone.

[KenPitts]

On Friday, May 24, 2013 11:50:55 AM UTC-5, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> Whorebath said:
>
> >According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>
>
>

And I get shit from this guy about what I do?

Ken

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:24:28 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote this
crap:

Thank you for checking my work. A real scientist likes to know that
his work is being verified.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 16:30:38 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this

I didn't see any. BOO-Yah!

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 18:10:07 -0500 (CDT), Moderate

<no_spam@no_mail.com> wrote this crap:

The funny part is that he couldn't prove that I lied. I went to the
website and did a search. Anyone can do the same thing and get the
same results. And he still didn't prove that MIT had classes in
climatology, the URL he listed was just a website for a newsletter.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Examples of BLOWHARD
Synonyms
babbler, blabber, blabbermouth, chatterbox, cackler, chatterer,
gabbler, gasbag, jabberer, jay, magpie, motor mouth, prattler, talker,
windbag, Horvath.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:54:18 -0400, Horva...@net.net wrote:

>On Fri, 24 May 2013 16:30:38 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
>crap:

>>

>>Climatology is taught at MIT.
>
>I didn't see any. BOO-Yah!
>

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 20:00:01 -0400, Horva...@net.net wrote:

>The funny part is that he couldn't prove that I lied. I went to the
>website and did a search. Anyone can do the same thing and get the
>same results. And he still didn't prove that MIT had classes in
>climatology, the URL he listed was just a website for a newsletter.
>BOO-Yah!

[Alan Baker]

In article <588vp895kgm6css3d...@4ax.com>,

Horva...@net.net wrote:

> On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
> crap:
>
> >Whorebath said:
> >>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
> >
> >Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
> >
> > http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
> >
> >
> >Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>
> I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and
> there was no climatology department.

There is no list of departments on MIT's homepage.

> This is easily verifiable.

Yes. And you're lying.

> There
> is a search engine in the upper right corner, (easily verifiable.)

Yup.

> I
> put in "climatology," (easily verifiable.)

Nope. It is impossible to verify what you put in.

> I got back, "No Match
> Found." Where am I lying?

I put in "climatology" and got 3100 hits (approximately).

<http://search.mit.edu/search?client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&p
roxystylesheet=mithome&num=15&submit=Search&as_q=climatology>

So where AREN'T you lying?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

[Alan Baker]

In article <31bvp8lpojdbq3u5g...@4ax.com>,

"ology" in English means "the study of"

So classes in climate and classes in climatology are the same thing.

>
> BOO-Yah! AGAIN!


Absolutely. You've shown your ass again.

[Moderate]

Horva...@net.net Wrote in message:

Well he is a serial liar. You can't believe anything he posts.
--

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Point out any lie that I'm supposed to have made. Dog killer.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:08:49 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>In article <588vp895kgm6css3d...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
>> crap:
>>
>> >Whorebath said:
>> >>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>> >
>> >Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>> >
>> > http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>> >
>> >
>> >Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>>
>> I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and
>> there was no climatology department.
>
>There is no list of departments on MIT's homepage.

On the left hand side, under Schools and Courses.

>> This is easily verifiable.
>
>Yes. And you're lying.
>
>> There
>> is a search engine in the upper right corner, (easily verifiable.)
>
>Yup.
>
>> I
>> put in "climatology," (easily verifiable.)
>
>Nope. It is impossible to verify what you put in.
>
>> I got back, "No Match
>> Found." Where am I lying?
>
>I put in "climatology" and got 3100 hits (approximately).

There's three dots at the top, "Google, People, Offices." I used the
Office search.

><http://search.mit.edu/search?client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&p
>roxystylesheet=mithome&num=15&submit=Search&as_q=climatology>
>
>So where AREN'T you lying?

Go there and do what I did and you'll get the same results.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:10:59 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>>

>> I guess you didn't notice that, "climate," and, "climatology," are two
>> different things. Perhaps you've been having too many mixology
>> classes?
>
>"ology" in English means "the study of"
>
>So classes in climate and classes in climatology are the same thing.
>
>>
>> BOO-Yah! AGAIN!
>
>
>Absolutely. You've shown your ass again.

It was a newsletter.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 21:50:34 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this

crap:

>>>
>>>>bkn...@conramp.net Wrote in message:
>>>>> Whorebath said:
>>>>>>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You started a thead to call someone a lair? Now that is low
>>>> level. You are a serial liar.
>>>
>>> The funny part is that he couldn't prove that I lied. I went to the
>>> website and did a search. Anyone can do the same thing and get the
>>> same results. And he still didn't prove that MIT had classes in
>>> climatology, the URL he listed was just a website for a newsletter.
>>> BOO-Yah!
>>>
>>

>>Well he is a serial liar. You can't believe anything he posts.
>
>Point out any lie that I'm supposed to have made. Dog killer.

You lied when you said I lied. You also lied when you said the POAC
website was the climatology home page.

[Alan Baker]

In article <otb0q8dtt50rjm1lj...@4ax.com>,

Horva...@net.net wrote:

> On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:08:49 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >In article <588vp895kgm6css3d...@4ax.com>,
> > Horva...@net.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
> >> crap:
> >>
> >> >Whorebath said:
> >> >>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
> >> >
> >> >Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
> >> >
> >> > http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
> >>
> >> I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and
> >> there was no climatology department.
> >
> >There is no list of departments on MIT's homepage.
>
> On the left hand side, under Schools and Courses.

There is no list of departments under "schools+courses". Here is ALL the
text below those words in that column:

"OpenCourseWare | MITx | edX
research
labs+centers | lincoln lab | libraries
community
students | faculty | staff | alumni
life@MIT
arts | athletics | video
initiatives
energy | cancer | diversity | global
impact
industry | public service
commencement"

YAL

>
> >> This is easily verifiable.
> >
> >Yes. And you're lying.
> >
> >> There
> >> is a search engine in the upper right corner, (easily verifiable.)
> >
> >Yup.
> >
> >> I
> >> put in "climatology," (easily verifiable.)
> >
> >Nope. It is impossible to verify what you put in.
> >
> >> I got back, "No Match
> >> Found." Where am I lying?
> >
> >I put in "climatology" and got 3100 hits (approximately).
>
> There's three dots at the top, "Google, People, Offices." I used the
> Office search.

So then you lied by omission by neglecting to mention you'd changed from
the default search setting.

>
>
> ><http://search.mit.edu/search?client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&p
> >roxystylesheet=mithome&num=15&submit=Search&as_q=climatology>
> >
> >So where AREN'T you lying?
>
> Go there and do what I did and you'll get the same results.

And it will only prove that you're not very good at looking things up.

But you lied about what you saw and what you did nonetheless.

[Alan Baker]

In article <v9c0q85jnhmn2f4pr...@4ax.com>,

Horva...@net.net wrote:

> >>>>>>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>You started a thead to call someone a lair? Now that is low
> >>>> level. You are a serial liar.
> >>>
> >>> The funny part is that he couldn't prove that I lied. I went to the
> >>> website and did a search. Anyone can do the same thing and get the
> >>> same results. And he still didn't prove that MIT had classes in
> >>> climatology, the URL he listed was just a website for a newsletter.
> >>> BOO-Yah!
> >>>
> >>
> >>Well he is a serial liar. You can't believe anything he posts.
> >
> >Point out any lie that I'm supposed to have made. Dog killer.
>
> You lied when you said I lied. You also lied when you said the POAC
> website was the climatology home page.
>

There is a department at MIT that teaches climatology, Steve. That
department is "the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary
Science"

Here are a few of the courses they offer:

"Introduction to Atmospheres, Oceans, and CLIMATE Dynamics"

"Past and Present CLIMATE"

"CLIMATE Physics and Chemistry"

<http://eapsweb.mit.edu/academics/courses/fall>

I could list others, but you'd quibble endlessly because the word
"climate" doesn't appear in the course name.

But the truth really is this simple: you were wrong, again.

[BAR]

In article <ajmvp8pikjdtnoorh...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...

>
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:21:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >>
> >> Whorebath said:
> >> >According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
> >>
> >> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
> >>
> >> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
> >>
> >>
> >> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
> >
> >There is a term for people like you and some others of your age around here and it is prissy
> >little bitches. Or, you could be called a teacher's pet. Or, the bully's side kick.
>
> There's a term for people like you and teenagers. Stupid.
> >
> >Yale has a class in animal fucking. http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4646
>
> Case in point. What does

> "On Saturday afternoon, Yale hosted a ?sensitivity training? in which

> students were asked to consider topics such as bestiality, incest, and
> accepting money for sex".
>
> have to do with this thread?

Why do college kids need a class in dog fucking?

> >
> >My wife has degrees in geology and chemistry, she could call herself a climatoligist.
>
> No, she couldn't. However, you have now lowered yourself to Whorebath
> just to try and throw a barb.
>
> You never learn.

Where are the official qualifiers for being a climatologist? If a physicist can call himself
a expert on climatology why can a geologist and chemist call themselfs a climatologist?

[BAR]

In article <9umvp8t9shtvnenlo...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...

MIT confers no degrees in climatology. Maybe they have a class on how to fuck you dog, just
like Yale.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

The original issue from Whorebath was to show him ANY college that
had climatology as a study. Many were provided and this specific
situation with him, and you, is a change of goalposts.

Amazing that you think you know so much about higher education since
you never matriculated into college.

[Moderate]

bkn...@conramp.net Wrote in message:

Dog killer for starters.
I will continue to call out your lies as
I have in the past.
--

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 21:33:34 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

Those are classes in physics and chemistry. They are not a
climatology department nor are they a climatology degree.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 20:52:46 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>

wrote this crap:

>In article <otb0q8dtt50rjm1lj...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:08:49 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>> >In article <588vp895kgm6css3d...@4ax.com>,
>> > Horva...@net.net wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
>> >> crap:
>> >>
>> >> >Whorebath said:
>> >> >>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>> >> >
>> >> >Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>> >>
>> >> I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and
>> >> there was no climatology department.
>> >
>> >There is no list of departments on MIT's homepage.
>>
>> On the left hand side, under Schools and Courses.
>
>There is no list of departments under "schools+courses". Here is ALL the
>text below those words in that column:

You are lying. On the left side there is a column which has "schools
and courses." When you put your mouse on it, it changes from an arrow
to a finger. Click on it and you will get a list of all schools and
courses. There is nothing there for climatology.

[KenPitts]

On Saturday, May 25, 2013 8:33:39 AM UTC-5, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>
> You are lying. On the left side there is a column which has "schools
>
> and courses." When you put your mouse on it, it changes from an arrow
>
> to a finger. Click on it and you will get a list of all schools and
>
> courses. There is nothing there for climatology.
>
>
>
>
>
> This signature is now the ultimate
>
> power in the universe

Is it safe to say that meteorology is different from climatology?

Ken

[KenPitts]

On Saturday, May 25, 2013 8:33:39 AM UTC-5, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>

> You are lying. On the left side there is a column which has "schools
>
> and courses." When you put your mouse on it, it changes from an arrow
>
> to a finger. Click on it and you will get a list of all schools and
>
> courses. There is nothing there for climatology.
>
>
>
>
>
> This signature is now the ultimate
>
> power in the universe

This has been the coolest spring I can remember in the DFW area. Low temps in the 50's just the other day. We are usually roasting by the Nelson and the Colonial. Must be that damned global warming again.

Ken

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 06:29:17 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
crap:

> The original issue from Whorebath was to show him ANY college that
>had climatology as a study. Many were provided and this specific
>situation with him, and you, is a change of goalposts.

Too bad you never learned how to read course descriptions when you
went to college. Just because the word, "climatology," appears in the
course description doesn't mean it's about climatology. If my school
had a class in auto repair and described how to repair a tire that
happened to BE FLAT. Doesn't make it a class on music.

I once took an English class that the course manual described as a
study in Science Fiction. We spent the whole course studying The Lord
of the Rings the Fellowship of the Ring. I got an A. That course
really helped me when I went into the Army.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 06:37:10 -0700 (PDT), KenPitts
<ken....@gmail.com> wrote this crap:

>Is it safe to say that meteorology is different from climatology?
>
>Ken

Of course it is. But you have to have some knowledge of meteorology
to understand climatology.

[jay birdsong]

wrote in message news:36c0q8deu45mji2ot...@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:10:59 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>>
>> I guess you didn't notice that, "climate," and, "climatology," are
>> two
>> different things. Perhaps you've been having too many mixology
>> classes?
>
>"ology" in English means "the study of"
>
>So classes in climate and classes in climatology are the same thing.
>
>>
>> BOO-Yah! AGAIN!
>
>
>Absolutely. You've shown your ass again.

>It was a newsletter.

Don't mind him. His "deathwatch" is taking a toll. He's counting the
days to "payday". So sad that a worthless loser like him has to wait
for a parent to die to get money. He never earned one thing on his
own.

[jay birdsong]

wrote in message news:otb0q8dtt50rjm1lj...@4ax.com...

If that worthless loser worked as hard at a job as he does here, he
wouldn't be keeping a "deathwatch" for his next paycheck. What a
dirtbag.

[jay birdsong]

wrote in message news:53f1q8t370822nkd1...@4ax.com...

I wouldn't put it past that worthless loser to speed up his
"deathwatch" with a pillow.

[jay birdsong]

wrote in message news:ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com...

>Whorebath said:
>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.

>Not according to the home page of their climatology department.

>http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/


>Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL

My goodness! Taking lessons from that other worthless loser, Baker?
BJ and Baker - what a team of Losers.

[Don Kirkman]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 07:09:47 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:

>In article <ajmvp8pikjdtnoorh...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
>>
>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:21:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
>> >>
>> >> Whorebath said:
>> >> >According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>> >>
>> >> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>> >>
>> >> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>> >
>> >There is a term for people like you and some others of your age around here and it is prissy
>> >little bitches. Or, you could be called a teacher's pet. Or, the bully's side kick.
>>
>> There's a term for people like you and teenagers. Stupid.
>> >
>> >Yale has a class in animal fucking. http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4646
>>
>> Case in point. What does
>> "On Saturday afternoon, Yale hosted a ?sensitivity training? in which
>> students were asked to consider topics such as bestiality, incest, and
>> accepting money for sex".
>>
>> have to do with this thread?
>
>Why do college kids need a class in dog fucking?

Can't you ever tell a straight story and stick to the facts?

"On Saturday afternoon, Yale hosted a “sensitivity training” in which

students were asked to consider topics such as bestiality, incest, and
accepting money for sex.

During the workshop, entitled, "Sex: Am I Normal," students
anonymously asked and answered questions about sex using their cell
phones, and viewed the responses in real time in the form of bar
charts."

The word "dog" appears only one time on that page you cite, and it is
not part of the presentation. A graduate student wrote a critique.

"Are you fucking serious, Jake? Suckerberg can issue me all the
warnings he wants to, it's not going to change my right to freedom of
speech. Anti-sodomite? Don't you mean normal? And what happened to the
days where we could post our opinions in a comments section without
getting scorned? Your post, as well as Yale "University", absolutely
sicken me. Go hump your dog and your sister in private, it is illegal
and will always be taboo... I don't understand why they're preaching
sensitivity to activities deemed illegal by most of the civilized
world." http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4646

Who's the liar here?
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 08:04:04 -0500 (CDT), Moderate

You support that "sport" and had to have gone to some of the fights.
That puts you in the same class. In fact, in Arkansas it's a crime to
even attend such. If you say you haven't then how can you know what
really happens there and say that if should be legalized?

You're a low as the owners.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Address all of those that were named, because that was your posit.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

A class in auto repair and one studying The Lord of the Rings. What
was the "easy A" school that you attended?

[Moderate]

So why do you call me a dog killer?

Because you are a serial liar.
--

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 16:54:39 -0500 (CDT), Moderate

Because you support them. Same thinking. Fighting them or witnessing
them are the same low, disgusting thing.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sat, 25 May 2013 16:37:08 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this

Unless you're hiring, there's no need for you to know.

[Alan Baker]

In article <53f1q8t370822nkd1...@4ax.com>,

You are incorrect.

[BAR]

In article <hn10q817p7plkhrup...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:52:56 -0400, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:24:28 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote this
> >crap:
> >
> >>In article <kq8vp89seuhjtc5sh...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:26:11 -0400, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
> >>> >crap:

> >>> >
> >>> >>Whorebath said:
> >>> >>>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
> >>> >

> >>> >I never lied. I went to www.mit.edu and saw a list of departments and

> >>> >there was no climatology department. This is easily verifiable. There
> >>> >is a search engine in the upper right corner, (easily verifiable.) I
> >>> >put in "climatology," (easily verifiable.) I got back, "No Match

> >>> >Found." Where am I lying?
> >>> >

> >>> >BTW, it's too bad you didn't actually go to that URL. It's not the
> >>> >homepage for their climatology department. It's only news on
> >>> >atmosphere, oceans, and climate. BOO-Yah!
> >>>
> >>> Wrong again. I guess you missed this at the head of the page:
> >>>
> >>> The Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate spans a broad program
> >>> of education and research in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and
> >>> Planetary Science at MIT
> >>>
> >>> Does the word "program" strike a bell.
> >>>
> >>> Boo Yah up your ass again.
> >>
> >>http://search.mit.edu/search?
> >>client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=mithome&num=15
> >>&submit=Search&as_q=climatology
> >>
> >>Just a bunch of papers, no degrees, no departments.
> >

> >Thank you for checking my work. A real scientist likes to know that
> >his work is being verified.
>
> Examples of BLOWHARD
> Synonyms
> babbler, blabber, blabbermouth, chatterbox, cackler, chatterer,
> gabbler, gasbag, jabberer, jay, magpie, motor mouth, prattler, talker,
> windbag, Horvath.

It is becoming easier and easier to see when you are beaten. Rather than cower in the corner
you lash out.

[Frank Ketchum]

<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:ki6vp811dthpcccl4...@4ax.com...

> Whorebath said:
>>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.
>
> Not according to the home page of their climatology department.
>
> http://eaps-www.mit.edu/paoc/
>
>
> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>

Like anyone cares

[KenPitts]

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 11:47:12 AM UTC-5, Frank Ketchum wrote:
> > Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL
>
> >
>
>
>
> Like anyone cares

You got that right. Bobby thinks he is RSG royalty.

Ken

[bkn...@conramp.net]

Not beaten and if you had a brain you'd know it. Whorebath is
everything above, and you're a wimp.

[bkn...@conramp.net]

On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:47:12 -0400, "Frank Ketchum" <fr...@nospam.com>
wrote:

You had the option not to respond Frank, but I guess you cared about
it enough. :-)

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sun, 26 May 2013 16:05:30 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
crap:

>>>

>>> Examples of BLOWHARD
>>> Synonyms
>>> babbler, blabber, blabbermouth, chatterbox, cackler, chatterer,
>>> gabbler, gasbag, jabberer, jay, magpie, motor mouth, prattler, talker,
>>> windbag, Horvath.
>>
>>It is becoming easier and easier to see when you are beaten.
> Rather than cower in the corner
>>you lash out.
>
>Not beaten and if you had a brain you'd know it. Whorebath is
>everything above, and you're a wimp.

I always know when I've won a discussion. You resort to name calling.
BOO-Yah!

[bkn...@conramp.net]

You have been proven wrong so many times by so many people that it's
impossible to count. Plus you're very childish.

[Frank Ketchum]

<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:s4v4q8p3dqlhn57hv...@4ax.com...

You caught me, you are right. I care deeply about your retarded back and
forths with Horvath. Bert too.

[andrcom]

> Whorebath

> Try to worm your way out of this one. LOL

nobody does it better...
bend over horey the class is lining up to kick your ass.

[William Clark]

In article <hv71q8pnt5tk1sju3...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:

> On Sat, 25 May 2013 07:10:37 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <9umvp8t9shtvnenlo...@4ax.com>, bkn...@conramp.net

> >says...
> >>
> >> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:24:28 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <kq8vp89seuhjtc5sh...@4ax.com>,
> >> >bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:26:11 -0400, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> >> >>

> >> >> >On Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:55 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote this
> >> >> >crap:
> >> >> >

> >> >> >>Whorebath said:
> >> >> >>>According to www.mit.edu there are no classes in climatology.

> >> >>

> >> >> Does the word "program" strike a bell.
> >> >>
> >> >> Boo Yah up your ass again.
> >> >
> >> >http://search.mit.edu/search?
> >> >client=mithome&site=mit&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=mithome&num=15
> >> >&submit=Search&as_q=climatology
> >> >
> >> >Just a bunch of papers, no degrees, no departments.
> >>

> >> Climatology is taught at MIT. Keep on being a junior Whorebath, it
> >> becomes you. LOLOL
>
> >MIT confers no degrees in climatology. Maybe they have a class on how to
> >fuck you dog, just
> >like Yale.

>
> The original issue from Whorebath was to show him ANY college that
> had climatology as a study. Many were provided and this specific
> situation with him, and you, is a change of goalposts.
>

> Amazing that you think you know so much about higher education since
> you never matriculated into college.

Just to add another wrench in the Horvath/Bertie lunacy, what do you
think is one of the main thrusts of Ohio State's Byrd Polar Research
Center? Don't be stupid enough to claim that these folks, who have the
world's largest collection of ice cores going back tens of thousands of
years, aren't using them to extract historical climate data, because
they are.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 08:07:36 -0400, William Clark
<cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote this crap:

>> The original issue from Whorebath was to show him ANY college that
>> had climatology as a study. Many were provided and this specific
>> situation with him, and you, is a change of goalposts.
>>
>> Amazing that you think you know so much about higher education since
>> you never matriculated into college.
>
>Just to add another wrench in the Horvath/Bertie lunacy, what do you
>think is one of the main thrusts of Ohio State's Byrd Polar Research
>Center? Don't be stupid enough to claim that these folks, who have the
>world's largest collection of ice cores going back tens of thousands of
>years, aren't using them to extract historical climate data, because
>they are.

I never said that the Earth wasn't warming. Quite the contrary, I
stated that the Earth has been warming for 12,000 years. The evidence
of the glaciers is obvious. I sail on the Great Lakes, a gift of the
glaciers. The land I live on was once covered by hundreds of feet of
ice and snow. I just don't believe that global warming is caused by
humans.

[Carbon]

And that is where 97% of the world's climatologists disagree with you.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:44:28 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

Well they don't have my degrees so they can piss off. I've got more
science in my little finger than all of them put together.

[Carbon]

It has already been explained to you that the field of climatology exists
whether you approve of it or not.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 15:23:27 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

>

>It has already been explained to you that the field of climatology exists
>whether you approve of it or not.

So what? Mixology exists too.

[Carbon]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 11:27:41 -0400, Horvath1758 wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 15:23:27 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote this crap:
>
>> It has already been explained to you that the field of climatology
>> exists whether you approve of it or not.
>
> So what? Mixology exists too.

So it's amusing that a politically motivated layman like yourself is
willing to discount a field of study that you know nothing about.

[MNMikeW]

What exactly are your credentials in this field of study?

[Carbon]

The same as yours. But then I'm not the one making claims about its
validity.

[MNMikeW]

Sure you are.

[Carbon]

No. Here is the endlessly repeating conversation: Ideologue: AGW is a
fraud! Me: How do you know? Ideologue: It's a scam! Me: How do you know?

Rinse, repeat.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 22:47:23 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

>>>

>>> The same as yours. But then I'm not the one making claims about its
>>> validity.
>>
>> Sure you are.
>
>No. Here is the endlessly repeating conversation: Ideologue: AGW is a
>fraud! Me: How do you know? Ideologue: It's a scam! Me: How do you know?
>
>Rinse, repeat.

Like I says, global warming started 12,000 years when the ice age
ended and the glaciers melted. Civilization wasn't around to burn
fossil fuels and kick it off. It's pretty clear that humans have
nothing to do with global warming.

Point number two. I like things the way they are. I don't want
another ice age.

Point number three. I've already pointed out that legitimate
scientists have shown that when CO2 increases, photosynthesis
increases. The level of CO2 will never rise too high.

There you have it, Chicken Little. Them's the facts.

[BAR]

In article <clark-38DEDC....@newsfeed.aioe.org>, cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-
state.edu says...

It may be the analysis of Penguin poop.

I wouldn't be touting Ohio State's leadership in anything at this point. You have an idiot
for a leader and it doesn't do you school or faculty any favors.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/apnewsbreak-ohio-state-president-jabs-notre-
dame-roman-catholics-sec-in-recorded-remarks/2013/05/30/38719968-c947-11e2-9cd9-
3b9a22a4000a_story.html

You would think someone in higher education would have a bit more tact than the idiot leading
OSU.

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...

Who are these 97% of the world's climatologists? List them by name and their credentials.

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...
>

The field of tit and ass watching exists but you can't get a degree in it.

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...
>

Are you always this subservient to those who have credentials in a specific field.

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...
>

Yes you are. You keep referring to these alleged 97% of climatologist but you can't identify
them.

[William Clark]

In article <MPG.2c11bc98b...@news.giganews.com>,

BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:

> In article <clark-38DEDC....@newsfeed.aioe.org>,
> cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-
> state.edu says...

.
> > >
> > > Amazing that you think you know so much about higher education since
> > > you never matriculated into college.
> >
> > Just to add another wrench in the Horvath/Bertie lunacy, what do you
> > think is one of the main thrusts of Ohio State's Byrd Polar Research
> > Center? Don't be stupid enough to claim that these folks, who have the
> > world's largest collection of ice cores going back tens of thousands of
> > years, aren't using them to extract historical climate data, because
> > they are.
>
> It may be the analysis of Penguin poop.
>
> I wouldn't be touting Ohio State's leadership in anything at this point. You
> have an idiot
> for a leader and it doesn't do you school or faculty any favors.
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/apnewsbreak-ohio-state-president
> -jabs-notre-
> dame-roman-catholics-sec-in-recorded-remarks/2013/05/30/38719968-c947-11e2-9cd
> 9-
> 3b9a22a4000a_story.html
>
> You would think someone in higher education would have a bit more tact than
> the idiot leading
> OSU.

An idiot who has raised over a billion dollars for scholarships and
student support. You Catholics need to get a sense of humor. I would
have thought you would have needed one after the Mant'ii Teo episode and
their dismemberment by Alabama, but apparently you have yet to see the
joke.

[BAR]

In article <clark-370144....@newsfeed.aioe.org>, cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-
state.edu says...

Big freaking deal, there is a president of a university in Virginia who is doing just as well
at raising money for his institution.

[Moderate]

BAR <sc...@you.com> Wrote in message:

Not a single climatologist has proven anthropogenic global warming.
--

[Carbon]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:23:09 -0400, Horvath1758 wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 22:47:23 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote this crap:
>>
>>>> The same as yours. But then I'm not the one making claims about its
>>>> validity.
>>>
>>> Sure you are.
>>
>> No. Here is the endlessly repeating conversation: Ideologue: AGW is a
>> fraud! Me: How do you know? Ideologue: It's a scam! Me: How do you
>> know?
>>
>> Rinse, repeat.
>
> Like I says, global warming started 12,000 years when the ice age ended
> and the glaciers melted. Civilization wasn't around to burn fossil
> fuels and kick it off. It's pretty clear that humans have nothing to do
> with global warming.

Let's stipulate that humans had nothing to do with global warming 12,000
years ago. In what way does that prove humans have nothing to do with
global warming today?

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 31 May 2013 02:38:57 GMT, Carbon

Because it started 12,000 years ago.

[Carbon]

So?

[Horva...@net.net]

On Fri, 31 May 2013 03:08:13 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

>>>>

>>>> Like I says, global warming started 12,000 years when the ice age
>>>> ended and the glaciers melted. Civilization wasn't around to burn
>>>> fossil fuels and kick it off. It's pretty clear that humans have
>>>> nothing to do with global warming.
>>>
>>> Let's stipulate that humans had nothing to do with global warming
>>> 12,000 years ago. In what way does that prove humans have nothing to do
>>> with global warming today?
>>
>> Because it started 12,000 years ago.
>
>So?

Perhaps I didn't understand the question. Global warming started
12,000 years ago, long before civilization existed. You want to know
why it still goes on today? The answer is momentum.

[Alan Baker]

In article <f49gq89rt6imrlp87...@4ax.com>,

So you're claiming that the globe has been consistently warming form
12,000 years and that therefore whatever caused it to warm starting all
that time ago must be what is responsible for its current warming, is
that correct?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 21:40:11 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>In article <f49gq89rt6imrlp87...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 31 May 2013 03:08:13 GMT, Carbon
>> <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:
>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Like I says, global warming started 12,000 years when the ice age
>> >>>> ended and the glaciers melted. Civilization wasn't around to burn
>> >>>> fossil fuels and kick it off. It's pretty clear that humans have
>> >>>> nothing to do with global warming.
>> >>>
>> >>> Let's stipulate that humans had nothing to do with global warming
>> >>> 12,000 years ago. In what way does that prove humans have nothing to do
>> >>> with global warming today?
>> >>
>> >> Because it started 12,000 years ago.
>> >
>> >So?
>>
>> Perhaps I didn't understand the question. Global warming started
>> 12,000 years ago, long before civilization existed. You want to know
>> why it still goes on today? The answer is momentum.
>
>So you're claiming that the globe has been consistently warming form
>12,000 years and that therefore whatever caused it to warm starting all
>that time ago must be what is responsible for its current warming, is
>that correct?

That seems reasonable to me. I don't know what caused it but I'm sure
it wasn't humans burning fossil fuels. Or possibly volcanic activity
caused the ice and snow to be covered in soot which absorbed the
sunlight, and the volcanoes spewed CO2 into the air also helping to
keep the planet warm. But the volcanoes are dead now.

[Alan Baker]

In article <rmcgq8hvmm5v8tnkb...@4ax.com>,

So your contention falls on its face if there were ever a time when
global temperatures were falling, doesn't it?

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...
>

You and your fellow travelers are making the claim that global warming is human caused and
you have offered no "irrefutable" proof that global warming is human caused. Turning the
question around and asking those who do not believe in your claim that if they can't prove
that it isn't happeneing is childish, immature and shows that you lack confidence in your
claims. Remember correlation is not causation, you state this often enough and it should be
tattooed on your forehead.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 22:40:49 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>> >> Perhaps I didn't understand the question. Global warming started
>> >> 12,000 years ago, long before civilization existed. You want to know
>> >> why it still goes on today? The answer is momentum.
>> >
>> >So you're claiming that the globe has been consistently warming form
>> >12,000 years and that therefore whatever caused it to warm starting all
>> >that time ago must be what is responsible for its current warming, is
>> >that correct?
>>
>> That seems reasonable to me. I don't know what caused it but I'm sure
>> it wasn't humans burning fossil fuels. Or possibly volcanic activity
>> caused the ice and snow to be covered in soot which absorbed the
>> sunlight, and the volcanoes spewed CO2 into the air also helping to
>> keep the planet warm. But the volcanoes are dead now.
>
>So your contention falls on its face if there were ever a time when
>global temperatures were falling, doesn't it?

Not really. Conditions on this planet have changed over time. That's
to be expected. Fossils of tropical plants have been found in
Siberia. Evidence of glaciers have been found as far south as
Columbus.

[William Clark]

In article <MPG.2c11c2f24...@news.giganews.com>,

BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:


> > >
> > > I wouldn't be touting Ohio State's leadership in anything at this point.
> > > You
> > > have an idiot
> > > for a leader and it doesn't do you school or faculty any favors.
> > >
> > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/apnewsbreak-ohio-state-presi
> > > dent
> > > -jabs-notre-
> > > dame-roman-catholics-sec-in-recorded-remarks/2013/05/30/38719968-c947-11e2
> > > -9cd
> > > 9-
> > > 3b9a22a4000a_story.html
> > >
> > > You would think someone in higher education would have a bit more tact
> > > than
> > > the idiot leading
> > > OSU.
> >
> > An idiot who has raised over a billion dollars for scholarships and
> > student support. You Catholics need to get a sense of humor. I would
> > have thought you would have needed one after the Mant'ii Teo episode and
> > their dismemberment by Alabama, but apparently you have yet to see the
> > joke.
>
> Big freaking deal, there is a president of a university in Virginia who is
> doing just as well
> at raising money for his institution.

That is what University Presidents are for. Gee happens to be the best
there is at it.

Too bad he wasn't looking while some clown let Maryland into the B1G.

[BAR]

In article <clark-D7C23D....@newsfeed.aioe.org>, cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-
state.edu says...

I was talking with one of the guys in the Terrapin Club, who was trying to squeeze money out
of me, and he asked about joining the Big Ten. My response was that I understood that UMD
wanted to be in the big leagues with the other large public universities. However, it will
take Maryland 10 or 15 years to become competitive in the athletic arena.

[Don Kirkman]

You are laboring under a misconception--as usual. Probably most
people, plain folks and scientists alike, believe in some pattern of
global warming. Most probably acknowledge that it is cyclical over a
very large time scale. What most of the AGW issue is about is how
much, if at all, human activity is *currently* contributing to what
appear to be unusually rapid and large changes over our short time
scale.

I doubt you'll find anybody that simply believes "global warming is
human caused".
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

[Don Kirkman]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:41:11 -0500 (CDT), Moderate <nos...@nomail.com>
wrote:

Has one *disproved" it? Or has that only been done by
opinionologists?
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

[Carbon]

On Fri, 31 May 2013 15:59:50 -0700, Don Kirkman wrote:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 07:21:58 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> In article <pan.2013.05...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
>> nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>>

>>> Let's stipulate that humans had nothing to do with global warming
>>> 12,000 years ago. In what way does that prove humans have nothing to
>>> do with global warming today?
>>
>> You and your fellow travelers are making the claim that global warming
>> is human caused and you have offered no "irrefutable" proof that global
>> warming is human caused. Turning the question around and asking those
>> who do not believe in your claim that if they can't prove that it isn't
>> happeneing is childish, immature and shows that you lack confidence in
>> your claims. Remember correlation is not causation, you state this
>> often enough and it should be tattooed on your forehead.
>
> You are laboring under a misconception--as usual. Probably most people,
> plain folks and scientists alike, believe in some pattern of global
> warming. Most probably acknowledge that it is cyclical over a very
> large time scale. What most of the AGW issue is about is how much, if
> at all, human activity is *currently* contributing to what appear to be
> unusually rapid and large changes over our short time scale.
>
> I doubt you'll find anybody that simply believes "global warming is
> human caused".

It is amusing that they're all so sure the scientific consensus is wrong
when they don't even know what it is...

[Carbon]

Is this man a scientist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky

If not, why not?

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:51:29 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

>>

>> Not really. Conditions on this planet have changed over time. That's
>> to be expected. Fossils of tropical plants have been found in Siberia.
>> Evidence of glaciers have been found as far south as Columbus.
>

>Is this man a scientist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikvsky
>
>If not, why not?

Who cares?

[Carbon]

On Fri, 31 May 2013 23:13:13 -0400, Horvath1758 wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:51:29 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote this crap:
>>
>>> Not really. Conditions on this planet have changed over time. That's
>>> to be expected. Fossils of tropical plants have been found in
>>> Siberia. Evidence of glaciers have been found as far south as
>>> Columbus.
>>
>> Is this man a scientist:

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky

>>
>> If not, why not?
>
> Who cares?

Velikovsky cooked up a number of highly unusual theories of celestial
mechanics that were counter to scientific consensus. He enjoyed a sort of
notariety for a while, but since his ideas were... non-factual, interest
in his work waned.

AGW denialists like yourself follow the same pattern. Like Velikovsky you
are laymen with limited understanding of the science, but since you don't
like where the science is headed you just throw a bunch of shit together
to create a more appealing narrative.

The thing is, you see, working backwards from some approved result is not
science. It's more, how do I put it? Oh wait, I know: it's bullshit.

So no, I don't care about your bullshit any more than I do Velikovsky's.

[Horva...@net.net]

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 05:41:36 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:

>AGW denialists like yourself follow the same pattern. Like Velikovsky you
>are laymen with limited understanding of the science,

I got a degree. You're the layman. All you got is some crap you read
in a whacko liberal Greenpiss brochure and you think you're an expert.

[BAR]

In article <pan.2013.06...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>, nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com
says...

You keep telling us that 97% of the climate scientists are in agreement that AGW is occuring.
What you won't or can't tell us is who these 97% of climate scientists are. No names, no
credibility.