| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Comments:
<0> RelDrgn: My first engrish.com submission! http://siksai.co.uk/~rhowe/img_0489-whocares.jpg
<1> rhowe: hahahahah
<2> Who here believes in global warming?
<2> Anyone?
<2> Beuller?
<3> Anyone, what?
<2> Believe in global warming
<4> who cares?
<2> You should
<3> Don't know, it's a possibilty
<4> and what i should do?
<3> I may not believe in hell, but that doesn
<3> ...doesn't mean I won't go there
<5> rhowe: lol at the engrish.com post
<5> I believe that Global Warming is caused by Al Gore opening his fat mouth
<2> BurningClaws: It's a good thing you don't care...seeing as your country faces the possibility of being half way under water in 30 years
<5> bull****
<3> that's when evolution weeds out the weak
<2> Not bull****
<2> atompngn: You mean natural selection
<4> heh
<5> yes, global warming is complete and utter bull****
<2> Ka-bar: Clue up
<3> right-e-o
<5> reality: I have
<2> Ka-bar: Hardly
<6> whoo-hoo backdoor swimming pool
<5> follow the money
<2> Ka-bar: Don't give me that bull**** excuse
<2> That's entirely, 100% utter bull****
<2> Follow "what" money?
<2> The opposition's money?
<3> ok, let's say I believe in global warming. what exactly has changed? have I reversed the process by believing? no.
<2> $17.6 billion Big Oil opposition profits versus the entire global climate change grant money of $300 million?
<6> and just how do you propose to stop people with a ****load of money from making even more ****loads of money?
<3> burn the money for fuel
<3> that way you don't have to hand it over to them
<3> problem solved
<4> money == evil
<5> hahaha
<5> not
<4> why not?
<2> XyZzY: It's not about who makes the money. It's about a distorted view of "follow the money"
<2> XyZzY: It's a rather close minded, narrow, and false view of grant funding that many people just do not understand
<2> XyZzY: Or choose to use as an excuse
<5> reality: no, it's more than just the grant money.
<3> BurningClaws: can not choose to be good or evil, therefore it does not equate evil in and of itself.
<2> Ka-bar: Then please. Enlighten the channel
<5> http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51302
<4> i think it's time to go sleep ;/
<5> BurningClaws: you're already asleep
<4> heh
<7> hi everyone
<5> not yet.
<7> i am new linux user and I have some questions. For example
<2> Ka-bar: So basically your argument against global warming, in the face of NAS research virtually proving that global warming is a fact, is based off of capitalistic opportunities for people to benefit from a crisis in a similar manner that big oil capitalizes on the non-existance of global warming?
<2> Ka-bar: Like I said before...clue up
<5> reality: only one example.
<6> reality: it's the most viewable issue yes
<2> Then again, please, englighten the channel
<8> She looks like a climatologist
<7> i am trying to setup gnokki sms.. so I need to know Whitch is the usb driver in /dev/ directory?
<4> lol
<7> is /dev/usb/ ?? ?
<5> reality: Are you aware that most of the "scientists" promoting global warming are not actually climatologists? Al Gore's so-called "experts" aren't really qualified to be making the pronouncements they're making?
<8> As you know, as gore is the lone voice in the world saying it's all going to ****
<8> all of those scientists saying that are on his payroll
<8> a little bird covered in oil told me that
<3> he DID invent the Internet after all :P
<5> and there are plenty of scientists who disagree, but they are virtually censored?
<9> atompngn: thats about right, yes he did.
<4> goodnight dudes
<9> atompngn: would you like some facts to slap you in the face with what you thought was an insult? :D
<8> thats how science works. there were plenty of people arguing for phlogiston too, but they were eventually dismissed as crackpots
<7> ih there any linux channel that I could ask some few easy questions ?
<2> Ka-bar: Are you aware that the NAS report on global warming included 11 of the nation's top climate scientists...including the most staunch dissenter?
<5> VNewLinux: #linuxhelp
<7> thanx ka-bar
<6> power, control, resources.
<5> reality: yes. and I still don't believe in global warming.
<3> NAS: National Academy of Sciences?
<2> Ka-bar: Which would make you either slow, or retarded
<2> atompngn: Yes
<5> reality: or one of the few who haven't swallowed the lie yet.
<8> Who has more money to throw around and doctor studies? the academic community, or big oil?
<2> And overall, in this failed administration, global warming scientists have been censored a lot more than dissenters
<3> Are they an academic group?
<2> atompngn: The nation's top scientists
<6> combine those with the mokeys simple thing of if we want it we will get it despite what it costs later. a common credit pipe dream
<8> Are there any peer-reviewed studies showing that theres no such thing as global warming?
<3> Are they scientist or academic "scientists"?
<8> because there's a ****ton of studies saying there are.
<5> atompngn: they are mostly academics funded by government grant money.
<2> atompngn: Both. Many in academia are also involved in corporations
<2> Ka-bar: Again, a common fallacy
<8> you know, I'm about ready to dismiss the people who discount global warming in the EXACT SAME FASHION as I dismissed those who said tobacco wasnt harmful
<8> those who say it's harmless are on the ****ing take. period.
<8> or they're just too gullible to see whos getting paid.
<2> Hell, Richard S. Lindzen is at MIT, supported by Big Oil, and an NAS member
<5> or the people who do believe in global warming are so ****ing arrogant as to believe that mankind has the ability to significantly alter the climate of our planet.
<8> theres mountains of evidence supporting global warming at this point. saying it's non-existant is about like saying that cigarettes are harmless. Everyone in the room just sort of shakes their heads sadly and snickers at the poor ****ers advocating it.
<2> Ka-bar: Again, clue up. You're confusing two issues.
<8> Ka-bar: you dont think mankind can do that? we've been capable of erasing all the life on the planet for 60 years now
<9> jesus == captain planet
<9> TenBaseT_: i heard a rumor that cockroaches will probably survive
<0> TenBaseT_: http://www.engrish.com/recent_detail.php?imagename=no-smoking-museum.jpg
<8> I have too. and that triple-chinned **** from Exxon too
<5> When Mt. St. Helens blew up, it threw more dust and "greenhouse g***es" into the atmosphere in a few days than we've been able to accomplish since the creation of the automobile.
<0> Mt. St. Helens was a once in 400 year event or something, wasn't it?
<10> Ok xorg now handles translucency right but then I can't work with kicker... ie change settings typical KDE
<2> Ka-bar: That would also be a false statement. Seeing as water vapor, not CO2, is the number one greenhouse gas
<6> so is the san fransico fires/ earthquake
<2> Ka-bar: And again, you're confusing two separate issues
<8> And the nitrated components of human combustion products is a real problem too, that doesnt get manifested in nature
<2> Ka-bar: If you're going to argue against something, at least get the issues straight
<2> Global Warming...one issue
<0> hm, no, I'm wrong. Mt. St. Helens once a once in ~50-100 year event
<8> What was feynman's line "Thats so far off it's not even wrong"
<2> Whether or not man contributed significantly to global warming...second issue
<6> reality: and while warming is happening, can they say _exactly_ what it will do? when they detonated the first nuclear weapons it was also thought that it would set the entire atmosphere on fire'
<5> *IF* global warming exists, and I'm not saying it does, I don't think that man has contributed significantly.
<2> Ka-bar: The "if" aspect has already been covered
<6> is it part of the cycle that has been happening for tha last billion years?
<5> reality: so you say. I'm not convinced
<2> You'd have a hard time finding a reputable scientist who says that global warming doesn't exist
<5> not at all
<5> reality: you sound like Al Gore
<2> Ka-bar: Hell, even the scientist quoted by your beloved Ann Coulter has written a retraction of her misquote
<5> "It's indisputable because I say so. EOT." yeah, right.
<2> Ka-bar: I've provided sources...you've provided...well...absolutely nothing
<5> reality: what sources? You haven't provided anything.
<2> Ka-bar: I'll slow it down for you again in case you missed it... the...NAS...report...on...global...warming
<8> okay, lets slow this down a notch
<5> You're just parroting Al Gore saying that the time for debate is over so you're not going to debate it anymore.
<2> Ka-bar: I have not said anything about/from Al Gore
<2> Ka-bar: The NAS report came out "after" Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
<5> Really? You sound just like him.
<8> the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had a report in 1995 that said so
<3> I cannot find this report
<3> The newest one I see is 2003
<2> http://www4.nationalacademies.org/onpi/webextra.nsf/web/climate?OpenDocument
<2> Ka-bar: That would be called ignorance.
<8> the G8's science acadaemies issued a report in 2005 saying so
<8> in national research council said so in 2001
<2> Even GWB has changed his stance on global warming as well. He says it's happening
<8> here, read on this for a minute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
<2> TenBaseT_: Science doesn't matter to freepers
<2> TenBaseT_: It's the same old trite **** over and over again
<8> group a> The moon is made of rock and a little ice
<8> group b The moon is made of cheese
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
Bufferedinputstream midp2
#AllNiteCafe
#windows
perl netfilter_queue
#networking
Do you spik Englich?
#AllNiteCafe
#php
ala zobbi
#networking
|
|
