sunsettommy

Conspiracy theories exist because conspiracies exist. There will always be people who do evil things to take power or money from weaker people. The idea that someone would say conspiracies don't exist is proof of suggestive of MKUltra mind control. Its rediculous, particularly after we all know about the WMD lies to start the war in Iraq. Conspiracies exist because people like you exist.

Then answer BLACK DOG'S questions way back at post # 20. You never have done so.

They did that a long time ago. <snicker>

LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! Then why is Dick Armitage NOT charged?

How about this Newbie? But one of the things we see with global cooling is unpredictability. I read that last line and it is stupid. Another dumb last line. So discounting it as stupid is your response? Then I suppose I could discount the entire article as irrelevant. Did you imply that global cooling climate is NOT unpredictable? You missed it.

The graft and corruption was too obvious.Therefore somebody had to clean it up.What better way than have a wind and rain cycle to wash it away. It worked because the city is half the population it was before the storm. This means fewer liberals in New Orleans who will be voting. This means the republicans might even carry the state in the next presidential election. Hurrah,hurrah,hurrah to the White House for their patriotic duty!

What is your point? Wow the answer is right there and you still miss it!

Sure it is pointless debate.All of it from him. He he he.... You can use the ignore button too. (smiling) I will just watch this dude trip all over this subject. I have seen excellent rebuttals on two other forums against that Killtown that would make this guy run away in tears.

He is fun to watch since his irrationality on the subject is great stuff.

You seem to confuse speculation with fact. If any debunker site speculates anything you are going to take it as fact. I never took it as fact. I was testing YOU to see how you handle differing opinions on that website over dust analysis. You flunked.

These posts ask me to engage in arguements based on speculation. <snicker> You have nothing is what you really mean.

I'm not here to argue for Jones. His analysis is not yet proof so its not fact. I don't care if Jones is right or wrong - there are competing theories. I will only discuss fact I have explained that I will not engage in speculation because it doesn't win arguements. Thank you for admitting that you have no rebuttal against the website over the dust analysis. LOL.

I think you are the number one contender for the golden hockey puck award. Pick one point from Popular Mechanics or 911Myths. I have dealt with your speculative web sites as far as I am going to. I will not argue with speculation that may be on these gate keeper publications. It has to be fact. Dragging me into an arguement in speculation shows that you are not interested in truth, you are interested in winning an arguement and will use any means possible. LOL, I already picked a point concerning THERMATE analysis. You keep ducking the rebuttal part against it. It is really that simple. The rest what you say is just bla bla bla.......

I'm not here to argue for Jones. His analysis is not yet proof so its not fact. I don't care if Jones is right or wrong - there are competing theories. I will only discuss fact I have explained that I will not engage in speculation because it doesn't win arguements. LOL, Then why did you say this? I just see another example of your unwillingness to make a full rebuttal. I gave you the opening and so far you have flubbed it. I think you are simply a paranoid conspiracist.

Here are a series of quotes demonstrating that Polynewbie does not want to fully address the sectional link I had posted about THERMATE. Polynewbie: Your evasive reply to something I plainly gave you an opening about the THERMATE analysis: Polynewbie: I never once asked you to make a rebuttal of the ENTIRE WEBSITE. This is what I was asking you to make a "FULL AND FRONTAL REBUTTAL" over, Refer to post #1535.That is what I was referring to. THERMATE Your feeble reply at posts# 1538,1540 and 1541 are not decent rebuttals. Meanwhile MY posts at 1539 and 1542 was an attempt to redirect you back into discussing Professor Jones analysis and the section at the website you obviously detest that discuss THERMATE in some detail. Your other two postings are just evasive and smearing.(#1544 and 1545). You have utterly failed to convince me that Dr Jones OR the section of the website are either right or wrong. LOL.

NP B.Max appears to miss it too. It's so long ago that I posted that, and there are so many stories concerning Strong I don't even know if that's the right one. Just about any story to do with the corrupt UN has Moe Strong's name in it some where. That is ok.

No I didn't. The only thing that it gives off in the process is heat, but obviously we both know that it takes an equal amount of heat to vapourize the water in the first place, so there is no net gain in heat. So, if you are somehow trying to imply that it is related to global warming, I think we both know it is completely irrelevant. As I mentioned before, this has been going on for bilions of years, long before humans existed. If you aren't implying that it's related to global warming, and you have another point, I'd love to hear what your point is. You are correct here. The part you still miss is the last part you still have not addressed. The transfer of that heat into the upper atmosphere.

Huh? You missed something in your simple hydrological description.

I voted yes. It is a small warming that has been wildly overblown over a trace atmospheric gas. There has been some talk of change in the oceans the last few years that may portend to a near future cooling.The Sun may also be approaching a "crash".Meaning less solar radiation. The warming we see is nothing special as compared to the MWP and Roman period.They were clearly warmer.

Not where I live. We might see glacial growth this year with the massive amounts of snow we've received. Lake Louise for example, has never had this much snow since records were kept. Hmm. Fancy that. I have been there.The start of the mighty Columbia River. The river goes right by my city in Washington State. Can you provide some data on the snowfalls and its history at the lake?

Your poll is broken -- there is no debate on whether climates change. The poll should be something like: 1. Climate change is not occurring 2. Humans are responsible for none of it (it's all naturally occurring) 3. Humans are responsible for >0% but less than 20% 4. Humans are responsible for between > 20% but less than 80% 5. Humans are responsible for between 80% but less than 100% 6. Humans are responsible for 100% of the climate change Obviously anyone who'd vote 1, 2, or 6 is extremely stupid. 3 is the best choice.

I do not think the argument that it is getting colder lately is common argument. It is the dispute over what level of blame on the increased atmospheric CO2 levels can be ascribed to man. I think it is a small effect.

At 5:15 pm! Gosh was the coffee weak?

NP B.Max appears to miss it too.

Water vapor has been coming off the ocean since as long as the ocean has existed, and will continue to do so no matter what humans do. But anyone with a grade 3 education knows that the water vapour condenses back into a liquid and falls back to the earth in the form of rain, snow etc... Giving up what in the process? LOL.