‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 > 
6 of 8
When do we put the lid on Westar?
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 76 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09
Larry Williams - 14 February 2014 03:46 PM

Sorta neat that the old CS has reappeared. He’s one of the few I’ve met, in my almost 70 years on God’s Green Earth, that is 100% correct… 100% of the time.  There’s no discussion, debate, or argument.  He has access to ALL the true documents… all the true facts… and anything but what he wants to preach is gibberish.

Yep… Every study and every consensus from scientists, meterologists, etc. are hogwash, unless they agree with the ultra right wing agenda.  I’ve so much to learn.  Now, I have that opportunity as we are blessed to be taught by a master.

Unwittingly, Larry, you are describing perfectly YOUR SIDE in the debate. It’s the CAGW proponents who say the science is settled. It is their scientists who refuse to debate any skeptics. They are the ones who claim all the true facts, but like Michael Mann, refuse to show their data. You flat don’t know what you are talking about and you are being dishonest. I am giving you 1000 times over the facts you are giving me and you have the gall to say I am the one doing what CAGW scientists are guilty of. You lack intellectual honesty. You completely distort the skeptic’s position, which is basically show me some reviewable science and quit cheating to make your case. That is why it is becoming obvious to the world that all CAGW proponents have is hot air, pardon the pun.
You can’t make logical arguments or discuss the facts I present like an adult so you and your twin resort to verbal attacks of darn near everyone involved…it’s the liberal way. Act like petulant little children because someone had the temerity to show how you have been hoodwinked and bamboozled with a bunch of propaganda. Your intellectual curiosity is zero. You are content to sit and be spoon fed pure propaganda without wondering why it just doesn’t make sense.

Where is the global warming, smart guy? Are you running scared over a one degree rise over 150 years? Something that has happened for millennia? Have you ever learned how to use that mass stuck between your ears? Does this have you getting your panties in a bunch and then wetting them?  No global warming… It isn’t around despite large increases in manmade CO2. These are facts that can be verified if you had the brainpower to do so. That doesn’t bother your fetid mind because, by gosh, I saw it on NBC news so it must be true? Doesn’t it make you wonder why every silly alarmist predicting gloom and doom and dire destruction for a 100 years has never been right? How there will always be some doomsayer making his absurd predictions? Are you that stupid? I don’t think so. So that means we have an intellectual honesty problem.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 77 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  737
Joined  2013-07-13

Yes, yes.  97% of global scientists are lying and cheating, and only Rick’s internet is tell HIM the truth.

Just a quick note, Becky, in 1974, there were no computers of any power, no weather satellites, no global thermometers, no connection of researchers, no weather modelling no global recognition of the problem, no data.

Other than that, boy did you get ‘em good with THAT one, eh?
Carry on.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 78 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Kramer, did you post as Common Sense on the old forums? Yes or no.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 79 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09

It’s been fun guys, but since you have nothing of substance to add to this, and argue like prepubescent children, and have little to no knowledge of the subject, I am through wasting my time with you on this subject. Come back with some intellectual honesty and a desire to discuss factual matters, I’ll reconsider. Until then the stink from the cesspool you live in with demonizing anyone who disagrees with you isn’t worth my time.

If anyone else wants to make legitimate inquiries I’m open. Stacia, do you need more substance?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 80 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09
Stacia Jones - 14 February 2014 06:37 PM

Kramer, did you post as Common Sense on the old forums? Yes or no.

Sorry, no. My first posts ever in this forum or any Mercury forum were in the last week. I have no idea who CS is or was.

Stacia, have I satisfied your request to post something of substance?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 81 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  737
Joined  2013-07-13

Definitely cs. Crowing victory as he clambers out the back window.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 82 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Chuckles, are you pretending to be someone named Rick Kramer?

Because you sound a lot like Common Sense, the blogs as “proof,” the namecalling, the 4-5 posts in a row before anyone responds to you. I was certain you were someone NOT named Rick Kramer, because I remember all our conversations on the old forum. You knew my maiden name, which I don’t even use on THIS forum. You recalled multiple conversations you and I had together, you knew where I worked, you shared info about your kids and wife and health that all matched someone who does NOT have the name “Rick Kramer.”

And now, a few days after someone was able to use just the login name “Bob” without a last name, “Rick Kramer” shows up sounding a LOT like Chuckles.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 83 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09

BTW, Stacia, I got a good laugh from the “mentally deficient parrot” moniker. The other names from the other two were boring…..I had heard them hundreds of times from the left on other BBs I have been on…..but I applaud your originality….I’ve never been called that before. Probably some truth to it :)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 84 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Okay, so now I guess we know someone can create an account on the forums with a fake name.

Best of luck, Chuckles. You’re gonna need it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 85 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09

Stacia, I have never contended that a blog was “proof.” It is the person(s) and the article on a blog that has credibility or not. And all that other stuff about Chuckles and your maiden name….I have no idea what you are talking about.

And sorry, I did no namecalling. The triad of you three cannot say the same: idiot troll nutcake etc,

Try to keep it honest there.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 86 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  737
Joined  2013-07-13

Remember, Stacia, he only has a quarter of his head left…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 87 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  962
Joined  2012-10-12

It is Chuckles. I don’t presume to know his identity…for certain…but it is the same bloated idiot that polluted this forum once before. Sorry Chuckles but the “most popular poster” feature has disappeared…and, when it did, I was on top…hahaha

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 06:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 88 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10
Rick Kramer - 14 February 2014 06:52 PM

Stacia, I have never contended that a blog was “proof.” It is the person(s) and the article on a blog that has credibility or not.

The unsigned, unsourced ravings of anonymous bloggers have no credibility.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 07:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 89 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09
Stacia Jones - 14 February 2014 06:59 PM
Rick Kramer - 14 February 2014 06:52 PM

Stacia, I have never contended that a blog was “proof.” It is the person(s) and the article on a blog that has credibility or not.

The unsigned, unsourced ravings of anonymous bloggers have no credibility.

You are right. Couldn’t agree more. Tell Larry and Michael.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2014 07:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 90 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  737
Joined  2013-07-13

They’re “anonymous bloggers”?  Larry and Michael?

Their sources certainly aren’t anonymous blogs.  You’ve rolled out several buckets of horseapples, Becky, with nary a citation. 

I think THAT’S Stacia’s point. What was yours again?

Profile
 
 
   
‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 > 
6 of 8
 

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502

Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.