[eureka]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

eureka eureka:

I have no intention of doing so, Roe. For the simple reason that I do not like their attitudes. My Army no., though, began with 2257: if they are what they claim to be, they would know the vintage.

Or maybe I will say this. I was attached to the Medical Corps but was not in the Medical Corps.

Wow, the secrecy involved in your service leads me to believe that you were either SAS or SBS. Or more accurately just a poser.

eureka eureka:

I would welcome some contrary opinions that have some support either in logic or evidence.

And yet every time someone does post contrary opinions you dismiss it outright. You're as dogmatic as any religious fanatic.

And where do I "dismiss it outright?" I post evidence that may not suit the contrary opinions. As I have said several times, I do not give my opinions about this except where opinion is called for and a lay person could have informed opinion. I follow the science otherwise.

For my military service, I choose not to get into personal discussion with people I do not know. And, I don't give a dam who believes. I could say that I consider Gunnair a sad sack of a 15 year old who tootles around Victoria Harbour in a row boat fantasizing about what he will do as a grownup. That is just as valid as his disbelief.

Seven or eight years ago, I had cause to involve the police i a problem with an internet psycho when I was engaged in a political campaign. That was one lesson I learned that has not gone away.

For what some of the others have said, what I post has nothing to do with Wiki. What I post comes from scientists who are involved in engaging the public (there are all too few of them.) Trying to persuade! Of course they are trying to persuade. They are those in that scientific world who have chosen to take on the deniers and bring the facts of the looming catastrophe to the attention of a public that is being deceived by certain financial and political interests.

There is nobody here who can argue the science, Not even zipperfish. There is no scientist who can argue it al. It crosses many disciplines. That is what the deniers take advantage of.

There are also some here with very big blind spots. The hostility came entirely from them and with the first post I made on this forum. It has been an unceasing barrage ever since. They have the wrong idea if they think I would back off from a fight. They are amateurs compared to some I have dealt with in a long involvement in public concerns.

[Zipperfish]

eureka eureka:

There is nobody here who can argue the science, Not even zipperfish. There is no scientist who can argue it al. It crosses many disciplines. That is what the deniers take advantage of.

.

Oh, I don't know. I can argue science until the sun goes down. It's one of favourite things to do actually.

[raydan]

eureka eureka:

There are also some here with very big blind spots. The hostility came entirely from them and with the first post I made on this forum. It has been an unceasing barrage ever since. They have the wrong idea if they think I would back off from a fight. They are amateurs compared to some I have dealt with in a long involvement in public concerns.

If they're so amateurish, why aren't you winning?

[eureka]

I am winning. All they do is scream.

[eureka]

This is one that you might find interesting, zipperfish.

Coldest parts of the Earth have the best solar potential,

http://cleantechnica.com/2011/10/23/col ... udy-finds/

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Google me, wiki me here and there.
Making up shit gets you no where.

What's next, posting a picture of a little known actress from the 1930s and claiming she's your wife?

That was part of Constantinople's undoing was in posting a picture of Evelyn Nesbit as his 'wife' not knowing that some of us actually knew Nesbit from her notorious relationship with Stanford White.

[andyt]

Roe Roe:

Gunnair Gunnair:

I suspect you are purposely being thick here or you simply have not paid any attention over the last few weeks.

I have seen many links thrown around.

When is it okay and when isn't it?

Just for future reference if you may.

Thanks.

Just try posting something without a link and see how far that gets you. Gunnair is just twisting trying any way to attack Eureka. Really his argument boils down to - I don't like you, nah nah nah.

[Brenda]

Funny thing is tho, that I never back up my opinion with links, and I never get shit.
Guess that is because I don't try to sell my opinion as fact...

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

Funny thing is tho, that I never back up my opinion with links, and I never get shit.
Guess that is because I don't try to sell my opinion as fact...

You also don't whine at others to provide links. Gunnair's got nothing, so he's gotta resort to whining.

Same with whining about another Global warming post, which you did. You don't like it, don't read it. If we limit ourselves to new topics only, this would be a very quiet forum indeed.

[BartSimpson]

eureka eureka:

I am winning.

[Brenda]

Sure, but if we limit ourselves to the same topics over and over again, the result would be the same... Quiet...

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

Sure, but if we limit ourselves to the same topics over and over again, the result would be the same... Quiet...

Typical woman's logic. Nobody said anything about limiting ourselves to the same topics. You have some new topics you want to introduce, go for it.

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

Sure, but if we limit ourselves to the same topics over and over again, the result would be the same... Quiet...

Typical woman's logic. Nobody said anything about limiting ourselves to the same topics. You have some new topics you want to introduce, go for it.

Really? That's typical women's logic?
I said something about limiting ourselves to the same topics, in response to your "if we limit ourselves to only new topics".

I don't know, but your "logic" does not really make sense now, does it.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

Sure, but if we limit ourselves to the same topics over and over again, the result would be the same... Quiet...

Typical woman's logic. Nobody said anything about limiting ourselves to the same topics. You have some new topics you want to introduce, go for it.

Really? That's typical women's logic?
I said something about limiting ourselves to the same topics, in response to your "if we limit ourselves to only new topics".

I don't know, but your "logic" does not really make sense now, does it.

You're right. I'm sorry. I should have said typical Brenda's logic.

[Brenda]

Really? So sticking to the same topics that everyone is bored of, and we can't reply on anymore (if you don't like it, don't reply, right?) is not making this board a very quiet place, but "limiting ourselves" to new topics does?