Page 21 of 34 FirstFirst ... 1117181920212223242531 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 673

Thread: eliot jacobson calls For Violence and protests on climate change

  1. #401
    Since we're posting informative shit which I love to do I'm gonna try and bond with you fellas.

    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  2. #402
    Been getting plenty of rain here in Vegas this last week.
    Temperatures have been Cold-As-Fuck this winter in the US.
    And the Left Liberal Media put out a report that the Ozone Layer is repairing itself and will be fully repaired in the next 40 years.
    So, Fuck You and all your Apocalyptic Bullshit.
    Jesus will return to the Earth and set up his Kingdom before Climate Change does anything to the Human Race.
    The Bible tells me so.
    Of course it also says that the world will be destroyed by fire this time around as God's Rainbow Promise is to never flood it again.
    Honestly, burning down the Earth and restarting can't come soon enough in my opinion.

  3. #403
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Been getting plenty of rain here in Vegas this last week.
    Temperatures have been Cold-As-Fuck this winter in the US.
    And the Left Liberal Media put out a report that the Ozone Layer is repairing itself and will be fully repaired in the next 40 years.
    So, Fuck You and all your Apocalyptic Bullshit.
    How can you be Cold-As-Fuck when you carry around 600 pounds of lard on your fat ass body???

  4. #404
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    So we are in the middle of another "hyperthermal" ?
    Yes. The question is whether or not the hyperthermal is caused by man,partially caused by man, or not caused by man ? Concluding that it is caused by man when it has been demonstrated historically that hyperthermals have occurred before man existed is foolish. IMHO I don't think we are scientifically advanced enough to answer this question.

  5. #405
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Since we're posting informative shit which I love to do I'm gonna try and bond with you fellas.

    Yes,it's always good to conflate Bigfoot fiction with the study of core samples under well-established geological methodology (to determine hyperthermal time frames) when you're trying to make a point.

  6. #406
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Honestly, burning down the Earth and restarting can't come soon enough in my opinion.
    --->

    Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology.

    https://anagram-solver.net/Honestly,....?partial=true


    Not bad, Monet. As much as our organs are of mind (of a form and purpose), then our brains are of body (of substance). So, no escaping ourselves by science, or otherwise.

    In general, the Silurian model is naturally suited to thus connecting the big crunches/bangs. By which we know that that there is a definite end/start to some form of intelligent life. And, the only truly alien contact to transcend time and space. By which the message to ourselves would be as unique as the process by which it's sent, ie, nothing to do with exploitation of the universe. I mean, not even those fellows believe in their own hypothesis.

    Anyway, it's always a pleasure to watch a bunch of stone-cold fools debate such things, say, on a gambling, or gematria, forum. Had to laugh at the bunch, at the latter, try to relate the new junk about a two-dimensional universe to this one. The consensus in the physics community is that even the such "singularity" was/will be four-dimensional, all along.
    Drug Rehabilitation + Haliburton County for the local thus clinics. The one in Haliburton town temporarily closed yields the closest, 4cast. 137 posts at NetVoid's forum, + 184 here =321.0, to overlap 3456 at the 3's, as the dimensions from 0 to 6, four by four.bb

    The unused, Zodiac bits: 'dakadu, Lake+151?s (164 char. max) seed the final two lines of the anagram solver -of lies/revenge. Franc Baconis for the capital L yields 141=69+ᘔᘖ; 397=[(10-6+9-1)^3-(1+ᘔ+ᘖ+1)^3].

    Thanks. CIA.0!

    Ha.

  7. #407
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    So we are in the middle of another "hyperthermal" ?
    Yes. The question is whether or not the hyperthermal is caused by man,partially caused by man, or not caused by man ? Concluding that it is caused by man when it has been demonstrated historically that hyperthermals have occurred before man existed is foolish. IMHO I don't think we are scientifically advanced enough to answer this question.
    This logic seems very wonky to me. The question has been settled for decades now but you want to think it is "foolish" to think it is quite reasonable and studied ?

    Fires occurred before man but that doesn't mean we can't conclude the source of fires. One could debate the issue with you if they're some sort of intellectual rebel but really?

    Anyway, I was going to point out that I approached this from the perspective of a gambler which we both seem to be. This has been predicted for some time now. So let me get this right - All these scientists managed to get lucky for their grant money by predicting this shit was going to occur but when it is happening we're all going to suggest it would be foolish to think they are correct. Would you agree with this? Do the odds of them getting it right like that play any part in your reasoning?
    Last edited by accountinquestion; 01-16-2023 at 10:20 PM.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  8. #408
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Been getting plenty of rain here in Vegas this last week.
    Temperatures have been Cold-As-Fuck this winter in the US.
    And the Left Liberal Media put out a report that the Ozone Layer is repairing itself and will be fully repaired in the next 40 years.
    So, Fuck You and all your Apocalyptic Bullshit.
    Jesus will return to the Earth and set up his Kingdom before Climate Change does anything to the Human Race.
    The Bible tells me so.
    Of course it also says that the world will be destroyed by fire this time around as God's Rainbow Promise is to never flood it again.
    Honestly, burning down the Earth and restarting can't come soon enough in my opinion.
    Funny, I don't recall the ozone issue being seen as an apocalyptic event.

    lmao God's Rainbow Promise.. you can't make this shit up... because someone else already has...

    I think we might agree on burning down the Earth but not sure what you mean by restarting.

    The interesting thing is that with nukes you have this concept of MAD to prevent them from being used. Very strong incentive. However if your country is already destroyed because 90% of your population has died of starvation and everyone left is currently starving. MAD don't work no mo'.

    Pretty easy to very very seriously threaten the countries with food. Lots of endgame scenarios that are interesting IMO.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  9. #409
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    So we are in the middle of another "hyperthermal" ?
    Yes. The question is whether or not the hyperthermal is caused by man,partially caused by man, or not caused by man ? Concluding that it is caused by man when it has been demonstrated historically that hyperthermals have occurred before man existed is foolish. IMHO I don't think we are scientifically advanced enough to answer this question.
    This logic seems very wonky to me. The question has been settled for decades now but you want to think it is "foolish" to think it is quite reasonable and studied ?

    Fires occurred before man but that doesn't mean we can't conclude the source of fires. One could debate the issue with you if they're some sort of intellectual rebel but really?

    Anyway, I was going to point out that I approached this from the perspective of a gambler which we both seem to be. This has been predicted for some time now. So let me get this right - All these scientists managed to get lucky for their grant money by predicting this shit was going to occur but when it is happening we're all going to suggest it would be foolish to think they are correct. Would you agree with this? Do the odds of them getting it right like that play any part in your reasoning?
    I've already stated my position on this which is that there is too much complexity to make a definitive statement about the cause of the current hyperthermal. The people making these conclusions should then also explain how the other hyperthermals previous to this one occurred in the absence of man. I now defer to Upton Sinclair in regards to grant money: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

  10. #410
    Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper View Post
    Anyway, it's always a pleasure to watch a bunch of stone-cold fools debate such things, say, on a gambling, or gematria, forum. Had to laugh at the bunch, at the latter, try to relate the new junk about a two-dimensional universe to this one. The consensus in the physics community is that even the such "singularity" was/will be four-dimensional, all along.
    I'm not debating.
    I'm spittin' facts!

  11. #411
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Yes. The question is whether or not the hyperthermal is caused by man,partially caused by man, or not caused by man ? Concluding that it is caused by man when it has been demonstrated historically that hyperthermals have occurred before man existed is foolish. IMHO I don't think we are scientifically advanced enough to answer this question.
    This logic seems very wonky to me. The question has been settled for decades now but you want to think it is "foolish" to think it is quite reasonable and studied ?

    Fires occurred before man but that doesn't mean we can't conclude the source of fires. One could debate the issue with you if they're some sort of intellectual rebel but really?

    Anyway, I was going to point out that I approached this from the perspective of a gambler which we both seem to be. This has been predicted for some time now. So let me get this right - All these scientists managed to get lucky for their grant money by predicting this shit was going to occur but when it is happening we're all going to suggest it would be foolish to think they are correct. Would you agree with this? Do the odds of them getting it right like that play any part in your reasoning?
    I've already stated my position on this which is that there is too much complexity to make a definitive statement about the cause of the current hyperthermal. The people making these conclusions should then also explain how the other hyperthermals previous to this one occurred in the absence of man. I now defer to Upton Sinclair in regards to grant money: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
    So the smartest guys in your HS who decided to dedicate themselves to knowledge instead of careers based on making money and we're supposed to believe they're driven by grant money.

    A grifter with no jobs skills except pandering on a Youtube for money get far more credibility amongst many of a certain type.

    I am fairly confident that physics PhDs can accurately model the interactions of the the radiation with greenhouse gasses. I'm fairly confident believing they can do this.

    However, these same scientists can't model how the environment will respond with any significant accuracy.

    I could understand your position if you were stating latter and not former but that isn't what is going on.

    The question is not whether man caused global warming. The only question to be decided is when and how fast is the shit going to smack humanity in the face.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  12. #412
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post

    This logic seems very wonky to me. The question has been settled for decades now but you want to think it is "foolish" to think it is quite reasonable and studied ?

    Fires occurred before man but that doesn't mean we can't conclude the source of fires. One could debate the issue with you if they're some sort of intellectual rebel but really?

    Anyway, I was going to point out that I approached this from the perspective of a gambler which we both seem to be. This has been predicted for some time now. So let me get this right - All these scientists managed to get lucky for their grant money by predicting this shit was going to occur but when it is happening we're all going to suggest it would be foolish to think they are correct. Would you agree with this? Do the odds of them getting it right like that play any part in your reasoning?
    I've already stated my position on this which is that there is too much complexity to make a definitive statement about the cause of the current hyperthermal. The people making these conclusions should then also explain how the other hyperthermals previous to this one occurred in the absence of man. I now defer to Upton Sinclair in regards to grant money: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
    So the smartest guys in your HS who decided to dedicate themselves to knowledge instead of careers based on making money and we're supposed to believe they're driven by grant money.

    A grifter with no jobs skills except pandering on a Youtube for money get far more credibility amongst many of a certain type.

    I am fairly confident that physics PhDs can accurately model the interactions of the the radiation with greenhouse gasses. I'm fairly confident believing they can do this.

    However, these same scientists can't model how the environment will respond with any significant accuracy.

    I could understand your position if you were stating latter and not former but that isn't what is going on.

    The question is not whether man caused global warming. The only question to be decided is when and how fast is the shit going to smack humanity in the face.
    Why do climate scientists always present the narrative that the current hyperthermal is unique in the earth's history ? Comparisons are always drawn with respect to pre-industrialized and post-industrialized man and never further back than that. I've already posted about Nobel prize winning physicists who disagree that the cause is man-made, including videos of presentations showing their models. You ignore or forget about arguments made in posts that are more than a few weeks old. Grants are extremely competitive - fuck yes I believe there is heavy bias.

  13. #413
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why do climate scientists always present the narrative that the current hyperthermal is unique in the earth's history ? Comparisons are always drawn with respect to pre-industrialized and post-industrialized man and never further back than that. I've already posted about Nobel prize winning physicists who disagree that the cause is man-made, including videos of presentations showing their models. You ignore or forget about arguments made in posts that are more than a few weeks old. Grants are extremely competitive - fuck yes I believe there is heavy bias.
    I suspect your biases have led you to false memories regarding the narrative about "hyperthermals". (don't recall seeing that word after following this shit for decades...) Regardless, there really isn't a "narrative" regarding this. That is an attempt by political types to frame this as a political issue.

    The original "global warming" concern came about because some guys figured out that due to physics, heat is trapped in the atmosphere. And this effect would continue to grow as more earth warming gasses are released from fossil fuels. From that it can be easily extrapolated that we're in for some serious problems but as we both know, modeling the actual direct effects is not really a doable problem. Climate scientists can come up with estimates but it will always be estimates until it has occurred. Estimates allow others to claim they're wrong. (Which is the exact reason I don't bother to post studies on here..)

    So given the above, where does a narrative come into play? It doesn't. No one cares about prior "hyperthermals". "Hyperthermals" are for people looking for counter-evidence and not the truth of this situation. The fact that there have been other periods of heating over the millions of years the Earth existed doesn't really speak to the whys or even relatively basic science portion that has been laid out.

    Yes, I'm the one with the heavy bias. That bias is towards the consensus amongst a very large portion of actual scientists. (guys who pursue truth/knowledge over $$$) These are the same types of guys who have made a lot of the advancements that have given us civilization. I'd be amazed if you could find 1 subject more well studied than Earth warming. Maybe cancer?

    I don't recall specifically about what you're referring to with the nobel scientist. I usually listen to the stuff until they start layering on the political nonsense. Regardless, 1 or 2 nobel prize winners isn't going to do enough to change my mind at this point. If we took a survey of nobel prize winning scientists, I wonder how many would say it isn't manmade and how any would?
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  14. #414
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    I'm not debating. I'm spittin' facts!
    --->

    Bingen Stadt station.

    https://anagram-solver.net/I%27m%20n...0?partial=true


    The station is the beginning and end of the Rheinhessen Railway to/from Worms.
    More folly of the Devil, who surely would claim such. On the other hand,


    I'm not debating. I'm spittin' out the truth!
    ---> Brushing The Mountain Top.

    https://anagram-solver.net/I%27m%20n...0?partial=true


    The difference is plain.

    In other news: Old, but humbled, Tablepooey is shining on AiQ some more. Similarly, more of the Devil's work.

    Ivar Giaever - Nobel Winning Physicist and Climate Pseudoscientist

    We often see scientists from non-climate fields who believe they have sufficient expertise to understand climate science despite having done minimal research on the subject; William Happer, Fritz Vahrenholt, and Bob Carter, for example. As he admits in his own words, Nobel Prize winning physicist Ivar Giaever fits this mould perfectly:

    "I am not really terribly interested in global warming. Like most physicists I don't think much about it. But in 2008 I was in a panel here about global warming and I had to learn something about it. And I spent a day or so - half a day maybe on Google, and I was horrified by what I learned. And I'm going to try to explain to you why that was the case."

    https://skepticalscience.com/ivar-gi...scientist.html
    Name:  md10192806114.jpg
Views: 261
Size:  5.5 KB

    Name:  Ted_Scott_Book_cover_1927.jpg
Views: 252
Size:  21.4 KB
    Last edited by TheGrimReaper; 01-17-2023 at 09:36 AM.
    Drug Rehabilitation + Haliburton County for the local thus clinics. The one in Haliburton town temporarily closed yields the closest, 4cast. 137 posts at NetVoid's forum, + 184 here =321.0, to overlap 3456 at the 3's, as the dimensions from 0 to 6, four by four.bb

    The unused, Zodiac bits: 'dakadu, Lake+151?s (164 char. max) seed the final two lines of the anagram solver -of lies/revenge. Franc Baconis for the capital L yields 141=69+ᘔᘖ; 397=[(10-6+9-1)^3-(1+ᘔ+ᘖ+1)^3].

    Thanks. CIA.0!

    Ha.

  15. #415
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why do climate scientists always present the narrative that the current hyperthermal is unique in the earth's history ? Comparisons are always drawn with respect to pre-industrialized and post-industrialized man and never further back than that. I've already posted about Nobel prize winning physicists who disagree that the cause is man-made, including videos of presentations showing their models. You ignore or forget about arguments made in posts that are more than a few weeks old. Grants are extremely competitive - fuck yes I believe there is heavy bias.
    I suspect your biases have led you to false memories regarding the narrative about "hyperthermals". (don't recall seeing that word after following this shit for decades...) Regardless, there really isn't a "narrative" regarding this. That is an attempt by political types to frame this as a political issue.

    The original "global warming" concern came about because some guys figured out that due to physics, heat is trapped in the atmosphere. And this effect would continue to grow as more earth warming gasses are released from fossil fuels. From that it can be easily extrapolated that we're in for some serious problems but as we both know, modeling the actual direct effects is not really a doable problem. Climate scientists can come up with estimates but it will always be estimates until it has occurred. Estimates allow others to claim they're wrong. (Which is the exact reason I don't bother to post studies on here..)

    So given the above, where does a narrative come into play? It doesn't. No one cares about prior "hyperthermals". "Hyperthermals" are for people looking for counter-evidence and not the truth of this situation. The fact that there have been other periods of heating over the millions of years the Earth existed doesn't really speak to the whys or even relatively basic science portion that has been laid out.

    Yes, I'm the one with the heavy bias. That bias is towards the consensus amongst a very large portion of actual scientists. (guys who pursue truth/knowledge over $$$) These are the same types of guys who have made a lot of the advancements that have given us civilization. I'd be amazed if you could find 1 subject more well studied than Earth warming. Maybe cancer?

    I don't recall specifically about what you're referring to with the nobel scientist. I usually listen to the stuff until they start layering on the political nonsense. Regardless, 1 or 2 nobel prize winners isn't going to do enough to change my mind at this point. If we took a survey of nobel prize winning scientists, I wonder how many would say it isn't manmade and how any would?
    Leaked climate scientist e-mails obtained from hackers.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta...h=5c7327b527ba
    Name:  yFTRP0n.png
Views: 285
Size:  14.8 KB
    Name:  rGj9FQX.png
Views: 293
Size:  18.3 KB
    Name:  BhPY8cM.png
Views: 307
Size:  9.4 KB
    Last edited by tableplay; 01-17-2023 at 10:16 AM.

  16. #416
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why do climate scientists always present the narrative that the current hyperthermal is unique in the earth's history ? Comparisons are always drawn with respect to pre-industrialized and post-industrialized man and never further back than that. I've already posted about Nobel prize winning physicists who disagree that the cause is man-made, including videos of presentations showing their models. You ignore or forget about arguments made in posts that are more than a few weeks old. Grants are extremely competitive - fuck yes I believe there is heavy bias.
    I suspect your biases have led you to false memories regarding the narrative about "hyperthermals". (don't recall seeing that word after following this shit for decades...) Regardless, there really isn't a "narrative" regarding this. That is an attempt by political types to frame this as a political issue.

    The original "global warming" concern came about because some guys figured out that due to physics, heat is trapped in the atmosphere. And this effect would continue to grow as more earth warming gasses are released from fossil fuels. From that it can be easily extrapolated that we're in for some serious problems but as we both know, modeling the actual direct effects is not really a doable problem. Climate scientists can come up with estimates but it will always be estimates until it has occurred. Estimates allow others to claim they're wrong. (Which is the exact reason I don't bother to post studies on here..)

    So given the above, where does a narrative come into play? It doesn't. No one cares about prior "hyperthermals". "Hyperthermals" are for people looking for counter-evidence and not the truth of this situation. The fact that there have been other periods of heating over the millions of years the Earth existed doesn't really speak to the whys or even relatively basic science portion that has been laid out.

    Yes, I'm the one with the heavy bias. That bias is towards the consensus amongst a very large portion of actual scientists. (guys who pursue truth/knowledge over $$$) These are the same types of guys who have made a lot of the advancements that have given us civilization. I'd be amazed if you could find 1 subject more well studied than Earth warming. Maybe cancer?

    I don't recall specifically about what you're referring to with the nobel scientist. I usually listen to the stuff until they start layering on the political nonsense. Regardless, 1 or 2 nobel prize winners isn't going to do enough to change my mind at this point. If we took a survey of nobel prize winning scientists, I wonder how many would say it isn't manmade and how any would?
    Leaked climate scientist e-mails obtained from hackers.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta...h=5c7327b527ba
    Name:  yFTRP0n.png
Views: 285
Size:  14.8 KB
    Name:  rGj9FQX.png
Views: 293
Size:  18.3 KB
    Name:  BhPY8cM.png
Views: 307
Size:  9.4 KB
    Why not link the actual emails? It is a very common tactic when trying to deny this unfortunate predicament- quote a few sentences and leave all context behind.

    Secondly, Forbes is a paid placement rag. While some of their stuff is ok - you should be super skeptical about these guys. If you're a paid agenda pusher then Forbes is a go to place.

    Thirdly, these quotes are of a few sentences out of 5000 emails. And contrary to a few studies being pushed by scientists you really should look at the overall picture. Your approach is to look backwards at a few relatively minor points. Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of studies with results that were purposefully meant to be misleading. I have 0 doubt but I also have enough sense to ignore obscure minorities. These people exist on pretty much any subject but sure whatever floats your boat.

    It really appears to me that most of these guys denying this shit have this "I'm a smart independent thinker" which is exactly what these nonsense peddlers rely on. "Hey, we're not like those people, we're INDEPENDENT. I'm smart because I question EVERYTHING!". "They're just after that grant money!" They don't consider these influencers after just after clout and clicks to be paid.

    Just last night I was talking to some guy. We're both doomers but he believes in this 12k heating cycle and claims it is far far worse than climate change. (lmao then how did the ecosystem bounce back???) Nice guy, well meaning, but simple as fuck. Same shit though, he gets his stuff from a youtube channel named skeptical observer. A bread and butter tactic of the guy behind skeptical observer is to hold up a paper and point out 1 sentence and remove all context. It becomes far easier to prove a bullshit point when you have 1000s of sentences to take out of context.
    Last edited by accountinquestion; 01-17-2023 at 10:56 AM.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  17. #417
    Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper View Post


    In other news: Old, but humbled, Tablepooey is shining on AiQ some more. Similarly, more of the Devil's work.
    Bill the pile of shit Yung aka The Grim Faggot with some more quips.

  18. #418
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/to...ff/ar-AA16rRvy

    It is already here and will only get worse. Just wait until water supplies of large municipalities run dry.

    People going to sell houses that have a fraction of their previous value to move to houses that have went up dramatically?

    Ahh well at least California fixed for now. Probably have a ton of infrastructure and property damage but whose counting?

    Mitigation of future effects and current effects is going to be a real whopper. Pretty sure many who believe in Earth warming don't quite grasp how fucked we are.

    Ohh throw up dust in the air! Innovation. Ok... so screw over quasi-renewable solar power.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  19. #419
    Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper View Post

    Interesting link, Bill. For those who aren't intellectual cowards, give it a sincere read.

    Actually, I noticed this. It is even better. Tableplay, please pick your climate denial excuse and see what they say. Then tell me how their response is bullshit. Good luck !

    oops forgot the 2nd link. https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
    Last edited by accountinquestion; 01-17-2023 at 02:33 PM.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  20. #420
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper View Post

    Interesting link, Bill. For those who aren't intellectual cowards, give it a sincere read.

    Actually, I noticed this. It is even better. Tableplay, please pick your climate denial excuse and see what they say. Then tell me how their response is bullshit. Good luck !


    Looking at all the pseudonymous user names here I see only cowards.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Recent interview with Eliot Jacobson
    By kewlJ in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 586
    Last Post: 03-09-2024, 09:28 AM
  2. Climate Change scientist list smarter then Rat Fink Elliot
    By Treeshade in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 09-07-2022, 02:59 AM
  3. Replies: 77
    Last Post: 08-25-2022, 11:14 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-10-2020, 03:53 PM
  5. Violence in Waco, Texas
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-19-2015, 01:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •