peladoboton wrote:Buz Groshong wrote:Blah, blah, blah,...,same old burning bags of poop,..., blah, blah, blah.
(my edit )
Hey Ejnar! I think he just called your post a burning bag of poop!
by Buz Groshong » Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:57 pm
peladoboton wrote:Buz Groshong wrote:Blah, blah, blah,...,same old burning bags of poop,..., blah, blah, blah.
(my edit )
by Buz Groshong » Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:23 pm
peladoboton wrote:buz, you have posted 5 posts here that have nothing to do with the original subject, nothing to do with climbing, and seem to be mocking if not attacking.
PnP whore, nothing more.
by Buz Groshong » Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:43 pm
by builttospill » Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:34 pm
Ejnar Fjerdingstad wrote:builttospill wrote:Ejnar Fjerdingstad wrote:Buz Groshong wrote:Aaron Johnson wrote:Hi Ejnar-
I did not move your thread, as I thought it was newsworthy. However, I can understand another staff member moving it once it wandered off into AGW land. I try not to move stuff around too much as it just confuses folks later on, including myself . Once a thread wanders way off course, I'm more likely to get rid of it, but I do that very rarely too.
Personally, I'm trying to give a wide latitude to thread subjects and where they are posted. I'm not sure about my cohorts. We're all in "summer mode," we've been vacationing, diverted and so forth so SP matters haven't been discussed as routinely as usual. I'll alert them to your query.
Gimme a break! It was bait for an argument. He was just trolling.
I report that a leading scientific journal (that actually used to be very pro-AGW) says the effect of CO2 on glacial retreat is just half of what has been assumed, and I'm trolling???
You play the victim terribly and unconvincingly.
You mentioned an article that agreed with your viewpoint, then went on to make unfounded claims and spurious arguments, and then failed to even ask a question (which you said you were going to do in your thread title. Moreover, you did all of this about a topic you know is controversial and over which you've gotten into countless pissing matches in the past. Your initial troll was decent, but this one is just sad.
I mentioned a new article that described some revolutionary findings by a team of Swiss glaciologists. To my knowledge, there has not been anything of corresponding importance reported from the IPCC these days, while it according to Nature (same paper) currently is having its "credibility under scrutiny" after they "wrongly stated that most Himalayan glaciers could disappear by the 2035."
by builttospill » Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:58 pm
by builttospill » Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:31 am
by Dave Dinnell » Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:07 am
Neophiteat48 wrote:"news" rhymes with "snooze"
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests