Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
Global Warming in Russia
Climate warning as Siberia melts
by Fred Pearce 11 August 2005 http://www.newscientist.com/article....mg18725124.500 THE world's largest frozen peat bog is melting. An area stretching for a million square kilometres across the permafrost of western Siberia is turning into a mass of shallow lakes as the ground melts, according to Russian researchers just back from the region. The sudden melting of a bog the size of France and Germany combined could unleash billions of tonnes of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. The news of the dramatic transformation of one of the world's least visited landscapes comes from Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist at Tomsk State University, Russia, and Judith Marquand at the University of Oxford. Kirpotin describes an "ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming". He says that the entire western Siberian sub-Arctic region has begun to melt, and this "has all happened in the last three or four years". What was until recently a featureless expanse of frozen peat is turning into a watery landscape of lakes, some more than a kilometre across. Kirpotin suspects that some unknown critical threshold has been crossed, triggering the melting. Western Siberia has warmed faster than almost anywhere else on the planet, with an increase in average temperatures of some 3 °C in the last 40 years. The warming is believed to be a combination of man-made climate change, a cyclical change in atmospheric circulation known as the Arctic oscillation, plus feedbacks caused by melting ice, which exposes bare ground and ocean. These absorb more solar heat than white ice and snow. Similar warming has also been taking place in Alaska: earlier this summer Jon Pelletier of the University of Arizona in Tucson reported a major expansion of lakes on the North Slope fringing the Arctic Ocean. The findings from western Siberia follow a report two months ago that thousands of lakes in eastern Siberia have disappeared in the last 30 years, also because of climate change (New Scientist, 11 June, p 16). This apparent contradiction arises because the two events represent opposite end of the same process, known as thermokarsk. In this process, rising air temperatures first create "frost-heave", which turns the flat permafrost into a series of hollows and hummocks known as salsas. Then as the permafrost begins to melt, water collects on the surface, forming ponds that are prevented from draining away by the frozen bog beneath. The ponds coalesce into ever larger lakes until, finally, the last permafrost melts and the lakes drain away underground. “This is an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming” Siberia's peat bogs formed around 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age. Since then they have been generating methane, most of which has been trapped within the permafrost, and sometimes deeper in ice-like structures known as clathrates. Larry Smith of the University of California, Los Angeles, estimates that the west Siberian bog alone contains some 70 billion tonnes of methane, a quarter of all the methane stored on the land surface worldwide. His colleague Karen Frey says if the bogs dry out as they warm, the methane will oxidise and escape into the air as carbon dioxide. But if the bogs remain wet, as is the case in western Siberia today, then the methane will be released straight into the atmosphere. Methane is 20 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide. In May this year, Katey Walter of the University of Alaska Fairbanks told a meeting in Washington of the Arctic Research Consortium of the US that she had found methane hotspots in eastern Siberia, where the gas was bubbling from thawing permafrost so fast it was preventing the surface from freezing, even in the midst of winter. An international research partnership known as the Global Carbon Project earlier this year identified melting permafrost as a major source of feedbacks that could accelerate climate change by releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. "Several hundred billion tonnes of carbon could be released," said the project's chief scientist, Pep Canadell of the CSIRO Division of Marine and Atmospheric Research in Canberra, Australia. >From issue 2512 of New Scientist magazine, 11 August 2005, page 12 |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
> Climate warning as Siberia melts Read this link first: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html Then go through the rest of the timeline: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html Note that ~11,600 years ago: Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees F) of the annual mean temperature. What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that you have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you pasted in yesterday: The global average surface temperature has increased over the 20th century by about 0.6°C... The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span of <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist kooks suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years or more. Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and air-conditioners. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. We are
talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into the environment, which is not a natural cycle. Last time I read and posted your links, they supported that most scientists supported global warming. usual suspect wrote: > Beach Runner wrote: > >> Climate warning as Siberia melts > > > Read this link first: > http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html > Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. You finally pointed to a URl that supports rather than opposes your position. It is still the position of the vast majority of scientists we are causing global warming. Not on a natural basis. > Then go through the rest of the timeline: > http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html > > Note that ~11,600 years ago: > Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there > was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees F) > of the annual mean temperature. > > What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that you > have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you pasted in > yesterday: > The global average surface temperature has increased over the > 20th century by about 0.6°C... > > The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span of > <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist kooks > suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years or more. > > Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical > changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and air-conditioners. No, we need to stop producing so much greenhouse gasses. And global warming caused by human activities is not a recent event. (you used the word "leftist kooks".) but is a product of the entire mechanical revolution. Just now it has accelerated as there are more greenhouse gasses. What difference does it make. You can't see the forests through the trees. Now as far as keeping Jewish dietary laws, it helped prevent intermarriage, which helped keep the Jews together. The Romans have little in common with the Italians. They were raped, pillaged, and their lands were taken. The same with the Greeks. The Philistines were not of Iran. No other nation has ever called Jerusalem a capital. Why now? When the Jordanians had control over the Western Wall, they used it as a public urinal. Arabs have more civil rights in Israel than any Arab nation. Bush's friends, the Saudis don't even recognize the right of a woman to leave he house, much less drive. They have slaves. I could go on with politics, but it is not appropriate. As far as the Palestinians, there were some Arabs living in Israel. They were never forced to leave and have full democratic rights. Why were they not aborted into Arab lands? The Jews were kicked out of Arab lands in 1948. This discussion should take someplace else. The vote, and if they want can serve in the IDF. They have equal rights. No one expected the Jews to survive in 1948, the British left the weapons and forts with the Arabs. The Palestinians (as you refer to them) chose to leave. Now where has all the aide to them gone. Not to their health or education but to foreign bank accounts. Bring that up as a an Arab, and you'll be killed. At least Daniel Pipes speaks out for the reality of the situation. Why was Arafat a billionaire while his people were in poverty? I've said too much and it should go elsewhere. Global Warming, as your earlier URL sites pointed out is a reality, as do other responsible scientists. You can't just keep pumping out greenhouse gasses and not expected change. Yucca mountain and it's consequences can not be taken out of the equation. There have been mistakes, and the more reactors, the more mistakes. We need real changes, independent of your party lines. |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
> Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The "changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or because of human activities. > We are talking about the effects of pumping > greenhouse gasses into the environment, > which is not a natural cycle. Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do the wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL natural sources of greenhouse gases. The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any "problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of time. It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing but rehashed communism you want to force upon others. >>> Climate warning as Siberia melts >> >> Read this link first: >> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html > > Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. > However, you can not doubt that > we are pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. >> Then go through the rest of the timeline: >> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html >> >> Note that ~11,600 years ago: >> Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there >> was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees >> F) of the annual mean temperature. >> >> What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that you >> have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you pasted in >> yesterday: >> The global average surface temperature has increased over the >> 20th century by about 0.6°C... >> >> The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span >> of <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist >> kooks suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years or >> more. >> >> Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical >> changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and air-conditioners. > > No, Yes. How the hell do you account for much warmer temperatures in much shorter time spans without cars, free enterprise, or GW Bush to blame? > we need to stop producing so much greenhouse gasses. You will eventually. We all do. > And global warming caused by human activities is not a recent event. Your own sources suggest that ANY global warming -- human events or no -- is a fraction of one degree. > (you used the word "leftist kooks".) Yes, because kooks from the left use this global warming red herring to advocate policies they know nobody would ever voluntarily adopt. It's a made up problem, and socialists and communists have a ready answer for it -- just as they always have. > but is a product of the entire mechanical revolution. And you're in a tizzy over about one-half a degree celsius when other warming periods on our planet occurred MORE SUDDENLY and of GREATER MAGNITUDE. Pity you didn't have a captive audience for your communist shit policies back then. Maybe when the earth cooled back down again -- as it will again do -- people would realize there's no correlation between your trumped up "problem" and your disgusting communist "solutions." > Just now it has accelerated as there are more > greenhouse gasses. Accelerated so that we've risen about a half-a-****ing degree. Woohoo. I'm gonna need a snowcone this afternoon. > What difference does it make. You can't see the forests through the > trees. I can; you can't. > Now as far as keeping Jewish dietary laws, I don't, and I won't. Not even my Jewish friends do that. > it helped prevent intermarriage, No, it didn't. Go back and read the prophets. > which helped keep the Jews together. Non sequitur. > The Romans have little in common with the Italians. They were raped, > pillaged, and their lands were taken. That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those same claims against Israel today. > The same with the Greeks. That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those same claims against Israel today. > The Philistines were not of Iran. I didn't say they were. The *Persians* are. > No other nation has ever called Jerusalem a capital. The Palestinians want to. > Why now? Why not now? |
|
|||
|
|||
usual suspect wrote: > Beach Runner wrote: > >> Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. > > > The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The > "changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees > C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or > because of human activities. > >> We are talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into the >> environment, which is not a natural cycle. > > > Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of > geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do the > wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL natural > sources of greenhouse gases. > > The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over > many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any > "problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on > our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of time. > It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing but > rehashed communism you want to force upon others. > >>>> Climate warning as Siberia melts >>> >>> >>> Read this link first: >>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html >> >> >> Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. > > > What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. > >> However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into >> the atmosphere. > > > I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. > Why waste my time? Kyoto would have been a start. Weather has become more extreme, permafrost is melting, and he says it's not extreme. Let other's judge. We've had the hottest years in recorded history. The worst storms. There are other causes of change, but we are pumping CO2 and other gasses and changing wetlands and grasslands to asphalt islands. To not acknowledge that is pure stupidity, but in your case, it's a psychological problem. BTW, you're not "from Tampa', your homeland was probably someplace in Europe. Native Americans lived on these shores. I have never insulted you, fell to you juvenile level of insults. All I've stated is the observation that you enjoy insulting people. It's a mark of insecurity. I feel badly for you and wish you would get the psychological help you so obviously need. > >>> Then go through the rest of the timeline: >>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html >>> >>> Note that ~11,600 years ago: >>> Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there >>> was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees >>> F) of the annual mean temperature. >>> >>> What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that you >>> have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you pasted in >>> yesterday: >>> The global average surface temperature has increased over the >>> 20th century by about 0.6°C... >>> >>> The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span >>> of <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist >>> kooks suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years or >>> more. >>> >>> Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical >>> changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and air-conditioners. >> >> >> No, > > > Yes. How the hell do you account for much warmer temperatures in much > shorter time spans without cars, free enterprise, or GW Bush to blame? > >> we need to stop producing so much greenhouse gasses. > > > You will eventually. We all do. > >> And global warming caused by human activities is not a recent event. > > > Your own sources suggest that ANY global warming -- human events or no > -- is a fraction of one degree. > >> (you used the word "leftist kooks".) > > > Yes, because kooks from the left use this global warming red herring to > advocate policies they know nobody would ever voluntarily adopt. It's a > made up problem, and socialists and communists have a ready answer for > it -- just as they always have. > >> but is a product of the entire mechanical revolution. > > > And you're in a tizzy over about one-half a degree celsius when other > warming periods on our planet occurred MORE SUDDENLY and of GREATER > MAGNITUDE. Pity you didn't have a captive audience for your communist > shit policies back then. Maybe when the earth cooled back down again -- > as it will again do -- people would realize there's no correlation > between your trumped up "problem" and your disgusting communist > "solutions." > >> Just now it has accelerated as there are more greenhouse gasses. > > > Accelerated so that we've risen about a half-a-****ing degree. Woohoo. > I'm gonna need a snowcone this afternoon. > >> What difference does it make. You can't see the forests through the >> trees. > > > I can; you can't. > >> Now as far as keeping Jewish dietary laws, > > > I don't, and I won't. Not even my Jewish friends do that. > >> it helped prevent intermarriage, > > > No, it didn't. Go back and read the prophets. > >> which helped keep the Jews together. > > > Non sequitur. > >> The Romans have little in common with the Italians. They were raped, >> pillaged, and their lands were taken. > > > That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those > same claims against Israel today. > >> The same with the Greeks. > > > That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those > same claims against Israel today. > >> The Philistines were not of Iran. > > > I didn't say they were. The *Persians* are. > >> No other nation has ever called Jerusalem a capital. > > > The Palestinians want to. > >> Why now? > > > Why not now? |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
>>> Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. >> >> The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The >> "changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees >> C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or >> because of human activities. >> >>> We are talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into >>> the environment, which is not a natural cycle. >> >> Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of >> geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do >> the wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL >> natural sources of greenhouse gases. >> >> The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over >> many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any >> "problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on >> our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of >> time. It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing >> but rehashed communism you want to force upon others. >> >>>>> Climate warning as Siberia melts >>>> >>>> Read this link first: >>>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html >>> >>> Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. >> >> What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. >> >>> However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into >>> the atmosphere. >> >> I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. > > Why waste my time? You started this discussion. I've demonstrated you were wrong about the fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles and, now, about the significance of "global warming." > Kyoto would have been a start. No, it would've been an end: an end to freedom, free markets, consumer choice, and to our economic expansion. It would've created an imbalance between nations like ours which already have stringent environmental regulations and those, like China and India, without them; our economy is already robust, developed, and mature, and theirs are now growing and using fossil fuels much less efficiently or cleanly as we demand. > Weather has become more extreme, Ipse dixit, unproven connection with respect to your 0.6-degree C temperature rise. You have no evidence that the earth would be any cooler if we all rode horses and had never burned a single drop of oil. > permafrost is melting, Just as the massive glaciers did following the last Ice Age. > and he says it's not extreme. It isn't extreme, but you are. > Let other's judge. Others. > We've had the hottest years in recorded history. Not here in Austin. We've set a couple of record low high temperatures (i.e., in which the high temperature recorded for a certain date is lower than it's ever been before) in the last couple of weeks. > The worst storms. The climate has ALWAYS been in flux. > There are other causes of change, but we are pumping > CO2 and other gasses and changing wetlands and grasslands to asphalt > islands. To not acknowledge that is pure stupidity, but in your case, > it's a psychological problem. No, it is not. > BTW, you're not "from Tampa', I never said I was. I'm from Texas. I was born on the Gulf Coast. You weren't. > your homeland was probably someplace in > Europe. Guess again. > Native Americans lived on these shores. http://tinyurl.com/8ueuw >>>> Then go through the rest of the timeline: >>>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html >>>> >>>> Note that ~11,600 years ago: >>>> Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there >>>> was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees >>>> F) of the annual mean temperature. >>>> >>>> What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that >>>> you have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you >>>> pasted in yesterday: >>>> The global average surface temperature has increased over the >>>> 20th century by about 0.6°C... >>>> >>>> The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span >>>> of <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist >>>> kooks suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years >>>> or more. >>>> >>>> Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical >>>> changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and >>>> air-conditioners. >>> >>> >>> >>> No, >> >> >> >> Yes. How the hell do you account for much warmer temperatures in much >> shorter time spans without cars, free enterprise, or GW Bush to blame? >> >>> we need to stop producing so much greenhouse gasses. >> >> >> >> You will eventually. We all do. >> >>> And global warming caused by human activities is not a recent event. >> >> >> >> Your own sources suggest that ANY global warming -- human events or no >> -- is a fraction of one degree. >> >>> (you used the word "leftist kooks".) >> >> >> >> Yes, because kooks from the left use this global warming red herring >> to advocate policies they know nobody would ever voluntarily adopt. >> It's a made up problem, and socialists and communists have a ready >> answer for it -- just as they always have. >> >>> but is a product of the entire mechanical revolution. >> >> >> >> And you're in a tizzy over about one-half a degree celsius when other >> warming periods on our planet occurred MORE SUDDENLY and of GREATER >> MAGNITUDE. Pity you didn't have a captive audience for your communist >> shit policies back then. Maybe when the earth cooled back down again >> -- as it will again do -- people would realize there's no correlation >> between your trumped up "problem" and your disgusting communist >> "solutions." >> >>> Just now it has accelerated as there are more greenhouse gasses. >> >> >> >> Accelerated so that we've risen about a half-a-****ing degree. Woohoo. >> I'm gonna need a snowcone this afternoon. >> >>> What difference does it make. You can't see the forests through the >>> trees. >> >> >> >> I can; you can't. >> >>> Now as far as keeping Jewish dietary laws, >> >> >> >> I don't, and I won't. Not even my Jewish friends do that. >> >>> it helped prevent intermarriage, >> >> >> >> No, it didn't. Go back and read the prophets. >> >>> which helped keep the Jews together. >> >> >> >> Non sequitur. >> >>> The Romans have little in common with the Italians. They were >>> raped, pillaged, and their lands were taken. >> >> >> >> That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those >> same claims against Israel today. >> >>> The same with the Greeks. >> >> >> >> That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those >> same claims against Israel today. >> >>> The Philistines were not of Iran. >> >> >> >> I didn't say they were. The *Persians* are. >> >>> No other nation has ever called Jerusalem a capital. >> >> >> >> The Palestinians want to. >> >>> Why now? >> >> >> >> Why not now? |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Beach Runner wrote: > >>> Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. > >> > >> The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The > >> "changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees > >> C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or > >> because of human activities. > >> > >>> We are talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into > >>> the environment, which is not a natural cycle. > >> > >> Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of > >> geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do > >> the wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL > >> natural sources of greenhouse gases. > >> > >> The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over > >> many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any > >> "problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on > >> our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of > >> time. It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing > >> but rehashed communism you want to force upon others. > >> > >>>>> Climate warning as Siberia melts > >>>> > >>>> Read this link first: > >>>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html > >>> > >>> Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. > >> > >> What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. > >> > >>> However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into > >>> the atmosphere. > >> > >> I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. > > > > Why waste my time? > > You started this discussion. I've demonstrated you were wrong about the > fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles and, now, about the significance of > "global warming." > > > Kyoto would have been a start. > > No, it would've been an end: an end to freedom, free markets, consumer > choice, and to our economic expansion. It would've created an imbalance > between nations like ours which already have stringent environmental > regulations and those, like China and India, without them; our economy > is already robust, developed, and mature, and theirs are now growing and > using fossil fuels much less efficiently or cleanly as we demand. > > > Weather has become more extreme, > > Ipse dixit, unproven connection with respect to your 0.6-degree C > temperature rise. You have no evidence that the earth would be any > cooler if we all rode horses and had never burned a single drop of oil. > > > permafrost is melting, > > Just as the massive glaciers did following the last Ice Age. > > > and he says it's not extreme. > > It isn't extreme, but you are. > > > Let other's judge. > > Others. > > > We've had the hottest years in recorded history. > > Not here in Austin. We've set a couple of record low high temperatures > (i.e., in which the high temperature recorded for a certain date is > lower than it's ever been before) in the last couple of weeks. > > > The worst storms. > > The climate has ALWAYS been in flux. > > > There are other causes of change, but we are pumping > > CO2 and other gasses and changing wetlands and grasslands to asphalt > > islands. To not acknowledge that is pure stupidity, but in your case, > > it's a psychological problem. > > No, it is not. > > > BTW, you're not "from Tampa', > > I never said I was. I'm from Texas. I was born on the Gulf Coast. You > weren't. > > > your homeland was probably someplace in > > Europe. > > Guess again. If I had a penny for every time someone claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. You cried and whined when I called you a boy (maturity level definition) saying it was racist, and indicating by that that you were black. From now on I will go back to calling you a boy sometimes and you will know (because I'm telling you so) that it is maturity based. Ok, boy, got that? I held the high ground for too long, holding back from 'boy' due to you crying racism. No more. Read the above and know that all future 'boys' refer to maturity level. If you ever want that to change, you will learn to post to others with respect and no name calling. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > > Native Americans lived on these shores. > > http://tinyurl.com/8ueuw > > >>>> Then go through the rest of the timeline: > >>>> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/100k.html > >>>> > >>>> Note that ~11,600 years ago: > >>>> Ice core records from Greenland show in less than a decade there > >>>> was a sudden warming of around 15 degrees Celsius (27-degrees > >>>> F) of the annual mean temperature. > >>>> > >>>> What is the amount of recent temperature rise over a century that > >>>> you have your knickers all twisted up over? From the stuff you > >>>> pasted in yesterday: > >>>> The global average surface temperature has increased over the > >>>> 20th century by about 0.6°C... > >>>> > >>>> The rise in temperature ~11,600 years ago was 2500% more in the span > >>>> of <10 years than the tiny rise today which you and other leftist > >>>> kooks suggest is from human activities over the last hundred years > >>>> or more. > >>>> > >>>> Global warming is a NATURAL phenomenon. We don't need your radical > >>>> changes to deal with it. We just need ice machines and > >>>> air-conditioners. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> No, > >> > >> > >> > >> Yes. How the hell do you account for much warmer temperatures in much > >> shorter time spans without cars, free enterprise, or GW Bush to blame? > >> > >>> we need to stop producing so much greenhouse gasses. > >> > >> > >> > >> You will eventually. We all do. > >> > >>> And global warming caused by human activities is not a recent event. > >> > >> > >> > >> Your own sources suggest that ANY global warming -- human events or no > >> -- is a fraction of one degree. > >> > >>> (you used the word "leftist kooks".) > >> > >> > >> > >> Yes, because kooks from the left use this global warming red herring > >> to advocate policies they know nobody would ever voluntarily adopt. > >> It's a made up problem, and socialists and communists have a ready > >> answer for it -- just as they always have. > >> > >>> but is a product of the entire mechanical revolution. > >> > >> > >> > >> And you're in a tizzy over about one-half a degree celsius when other > >> warming periods on our planet occurred MORE SUDDENLY and of GREATER > >> MAGNITUDE. Pity you didn't have a captive audience for your communist > >> shit policies back then. Maybe when the earth cooled back down again > >> -- as it will again do -- people would realize there's no correlation > >> between your trumped up "problem" and your disgusting communist > >> "solutions." > >> > >>> Just now it has accelerated as there are more greenhouse gasses. > >> > >> > >> > >> Accelerated so that we've risen about a half-a-****ing degree. Woohoo. > >> I'm gonna need a snowcone this afternoon. > >> > >>> What difference does it make. You can't see the forests through the > >>> trees. > >> > >> > >> > >> I can; you can't. > >> > >>> Now as far as keeping Jewish dietary laws, > >> > >> > >> > >> I don't, and I won't. Not even my Jewish friends do that. > >> > >>> it helped prevent intermarriage, > >> > >> > >> > >> No, it didn't. Go back and read the prophets. > >> > >>> which helped keep the Jews together. > >> > >> > >> > >> Non sequitur. > >> > >>> The Romans have little in common with the Italians. They were > >>> raped, pillaged, and their lands were taken. > >> > >> > >> > >> That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those > >> same claims against Israel today. > >> > >>> The same with the Greeks. > >> > >> > >> > >> That's pretty common in human history, and the Palestinians make those > >> same claims against Israel today. > >> > >>> The Philistines were not of Iran. > >> > >> > >> > >> I didn't say they were. The *Persians* are. > >> > >>> No other nation has ever called Jerusalem a capital. > >> > >> > >> > >> The Palestinians want to. > >> > >>> Why now? > >> > >> > >> > >> Why not now? |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>>>Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. >>>> >>>>The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The >>>>"changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees >>>>C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or >>>>because of human activities. >>>> >>>> >>>>>We are talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into >>>>>the environment, which is not a natural cycle. >>>> >>>>Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of >>>>geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do >>>>the wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL >>>>natural sources of greenhouse gases. >>>> >>>>The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over >>>>many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any >>>>"problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on >>>>our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of >>>>time. It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing >>>>but rehashed communism you want to force upon others. >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>Climate warning as Siberia melts >>>>>> >>>>>>Read this link first: >>>>>>http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html >>>>> >>>>>Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. >>>> >>>>What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. >>>> >>>> >>>>>However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into >>>>>the atmosphere. >>>> >>>>I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. >>> >>>Why waste my time? >> >>You started this discussion. I've demonstrated you were wrong about the >>fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles and, now, about the significance of >>"global warming." >> >> >>>Kyoto would have been a start. >> >>No, it would've been an end: an end to freedom, free markets, consumer >>choice, and to our economic expansion. It would've created an imbalance >>between nations like ours which already have stringent environmental >>regulations and those, like China and India, without them; our economy >>is already robust, developed, and mature, and theirs are now growing and >>using fossil fuels much less efficiently or cleanly as we demand. >> >> >>>Weather has become more extreme, >> >>Ipse dixit, unproven connection with respect to your 0.6-degree C >>temperature rise. You have no evidence that the earth would be any >>cooler if we all rode horses and had never burned a single drop of oil. >> >> >>>permafrost is melting, >> >>Just as the massive glaciers did following the last Ice Age. >> >> >>>and he says it's not extreme. >> >>It isn't extreme, but you are. >> >> >>>Let other's judge. >> >>Others. >> >> >>>We've had the hottest years in recorded history. >> >>Not here in Austin. We've set a couple of record low high temperatures >>(i.e., in which the high temperature recorded for a certain date is >>lower than it's ever been before) in the last couple of weeks. >> >> >>>The worst storms. >> >>The climate has ALWAYS been in flux. >> >> >>>There are other causes of change, but we are pumping >>>CO2 and other gasses and changing wetlands and grasslands to asphalt >>>islands. To not acknowledge that is pure stupidity, but in your case, >>>it's a psychological problem. >> >>No, it is not. >> >> >>>BTW, you're not "from Tampa', >> >>I never said I was. I'm from Texas. I was born on the Gulf Coast. You >>weren't. >> >> >>>your homeland was probably someplace in >>>Europe. >> >>Guess again. > > If I had a penny for every time someone > claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. You don't, and you aren't. > You cried No. > and whined No, I objected. > when I called you a boy Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested development. > saying it was racist, and indicating by > that that you were black. I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an interracial family. For example: http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>>>Why waste my time. We are not talking about slow natural change. > >>>> > >>>>The warming over 11000 years ago was large, abrupt, and natural. The > >>>>"changes" you Chicken Littles keep harping about is small (0.6 degrees > >>>>C), slow, and open to discussion about how much if it's natural or > >>>>because of human activities. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>We are talking about the effects of pumping greenhouse gasses into > >>>>>the environment, which is not a natural cycle. > >>>> > >>>>Ipse dixit and not entirely correct: volcanos and other sources of > >>>>geothermal gas release emit plenty of greenhouse gases. So, too, do > >>>>the wastes from wildlife, livestock, and mankind. Those are ALL > >>>>natural sources of greenhouse gases. > >>>> > >>>>The fact that the increase has been only a fraction of a degree over > >>>>many decades should settle the discussion about the magnitude of any > >>>>"problem" when compared to known pre-industrial age warming events on > >>>>our planet which were much more drastic in much shorter amounts of > >>>>time. It's not a problem, and your sham solutions to it are nothing > >>>>but rehashed communism you want to force upon others. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>Climate warning as Siberia melts > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Read this link first: > >>>>>>http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html > >>>>> > >>>>>Fine, abrupt climatic change can occur. > >>>> > >>>>What we're experiencing now is not abrupt. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>However, you can not doubt that we are pumping greenhouse gasses into > >>>>>the atmosphere. > >>>> > >>>>I can and DO doubt that it's as catastrophic as you claim. > >>> > >>>Why waste my time? > >> > >>You started this discussion. I've demonstrated you were wrong about the > >>fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles and, now, about the significance of > >>"global warming." > >> > >> > >>>Kyoto would have been a start. > >> > >>No, it would've been an end: an end to freedom, free markets, consumer > >>choice, and to our economic expansion. It would've created an imbalance > >>between nations like ours which already have stringent environmental > >>regulations and those, like China and India, without them; our economy > >>is already robust, developed, and mature, and theirs are now growing and > >>using fossil fuels much less efficiently or cleanly as we demand. > >> > >> > >>>Weather has become more extreme, > >> > >>Ipse dixit, unproven connection with respect to your 0.6-degree C > >>temperature rise. You have no evidence that the earth would be any > >>cooler if we all rode horses and had never burned a single drop of oil. > >> > >> > >>>permafrost is melting, > >> > >>Just as the massive glaciers did following the last Ice Age. > >> > >> > >>>and he says it's not extreme. > >> > >>It isn't extreme, but you are. > >> > >> > >>>Let other's judge. > >> > >>Others. > >> > >> > >>>We've had the hottest years in recorded history. > >> > >>Not here in Austin. We've set a couple of record low high temperatures > >>(i.e., in which the high temperature recorded for a certain date is > >>lower than it's ever been before) in the last couple of weeks. > >> > >> > >>>The worst storms. > >> > >>The climate has ALWAYS been in flux. > >> > >> > >>>There are other causes of change, but we are pumping > >>>CO2 and other gasses and changing wetlands and grasslands to asphalt > >>>islands. To not acknowledge that is pure stupidity, but in your case, > >>>it's a psychological problem. > >> > >>No, it is not. > >> > >> > >>>BTW, you're not "from Tampa', > >> > >>I never said I was. I'm from Texas. I was born on the Gulf Coast. You > >>weren't. > >> > >> > >>>your homeland was probably someplace in > >>>Europe. > >> > >>Guess again. > > > > If I had a penny for every time someone > > claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > > You don't, and you aren't. > > > You cried > > No. Yes, waaah, waaah, waaah. > > and whined > > No, I objected. > > > when I called you a boy > > Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to > do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested > development. Well, I'm glad we agree on the maturity definition as opposed to any racist one. > > saying it was racist, and indicating by > > that that you were black. > > I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an > interracial family. > > For example: > http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 Big ****ing deal. You implied that you were all hurt by the word boy, and I stopped calling you it, despite your sexist and nasty name-calling. No more, little boy. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >> >>You don't, and you aren't. Established. >>>You cried >> >>No. > > Yes, No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>>and whined >> >>No, I objected. >> >>>when I called you a boy >> >>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to >>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested >>development. > > Well, I'm glad You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>that that you were black. >> >>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an >>interracial family. >> >>For example: >>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > > Big ****ing deal. It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>If I had a penny for every time someone > >>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > >> > >>You don't, and you aren't. > > Established. Why are you trying to reaffirm something you already typed? Are you trying to convince yourself? > >>>You cried > >> > >>No. > > > > Yes, > > No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. You never ask anything politely. I'll make you a deal. You stop calling me the sexist word ****, and I'll stop calling you boy. I'll bet you can't do it. Do as I say but not as I do... > >>>and whined > >> > >>No, I objected. > >> > >>>when I called you a boy > >> > >>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to > >>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested > >>development. > > > > Well, I'm glad > > You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely > self-crippling case of arrested development. > > >>>saying it was racist, and indicating by > >>>that that you were black. > >> > >>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an > >>interracial family. > >> > >>For example: > >>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > >>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > > > > Big ****ing deal. > > It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. Lied about what? You pretending that you found 'boy' offensive due to feeling it was racist and thereby implying you were black? Why are sexist and other insults ok for you to use but you can't take mild name calling from the other side? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.e...g/climate.html Fow those itnerested. Look at the pictures of 1993 versus today. Climate Change — Hollywood Fiction or Reality? Carbon dioxide levels today are nearly 30% more than they were prior to the industrial revolution. What is truly unprecedented about current carbon dioxide levels is the speed in which they have risen. In the millions of years of known geological history, the Earth has never experienced such a rapid rise. The signature of human influence is unequivocal.There is no doubt that we have caused this change to the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels. full story >> and gnoring Global Warming americanprogress.org The Financial Times reports, "one million species of plants and animals could be driven to extinction by another 50 years of global warming, according to a study published on Thursday in the British journal Nature." Under the panel's minimum scenario, 18% of species would be lost, while their "middle-of-the-road" prediction found that 24% of species will die. The United Nations said "the prospect is also a threat to the billions of people who rely on Nature for their survival." The study came at the same time researchers released a report showing "global climate change could be pushing a rise in infectious diseases, respiratory illnesses, allergies and malnutrition." That is consistent with a World Health Organization report last month that warned "global warming killed 150,000 people in 2000 and the death toll could double again in the next 30 years if current trends are not reversed." In one example of how dire the situation could become, the Des Moines Register reports a new study by the Union of Concerned Scientists shows Iowa could see a 22 degree increase in just 100 years, wreaking havoc on the state's agricultural economy. THINGS CAN BE FIXED: The news in the report was not all grim. It said efforts by humans to "cut greenhouse gases today could save many species from vanishing." While some conservatives continue to claim that human activities have nothing to do with global warming, the American Geophysical Union, the world's largest organization of earth, ocean, and climate scientists – and typically a cautious group - issued a strongly worded statement last month concluding that "human activities are increasingly altering the Earth's climate." OBSTACLES TO FIXING: The problem is that key conservative lawmakers – many of whom take huge sums of money from polluters who would be affected by tougher environmental regulations - continue to ignore scientific reality. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy, said on 5/23/01: “The whole concept of global warming may be exactly wrong, could be totally 180 degrees wrong.” Barton has taken more than $595,000 from the electric/gas industry since 2000. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said on 7/28/03: "The debate is shifting away from those who subscribe to global-warming alarmism.” Inhofe has taken $458,669 from the oil/electric/gas industry since 1999. IGNORING INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS: President Bush, who has taken more than $2.8 million from the oil and gas industries which would be affected by tougher global warming regs, continues to undermine efforts to address the issue. As the Christian Science Monitor noted, "Several science-policy experts argue that no presidency has been more calculating and ideological than the Bush administration in setting political parameters for science." Soon after taking office, he withdrew the U.S. from negotiations over the Kyoto Protocol – and then last month further insulted the international effort. At a 180-nation meeting in Milan, the Administration denounced "the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol as an unrealistic 'straitjacket' for curbing global warming." WHITE HOUSE PROPOSES SHAM: Despite 120 nations signing onto the Kyoto accord, the Administration rejected it, saying its voluntary policies for emissions reductions would suffice. But as AP reports, "only a tiny fraction of American companies that pollute have signed up." As the original WP story notes, of the thousands of U.S. companies with pollution problems, only 50 have joined the Climate Leaders program, and "of the companies that have signed up, only 14 have set goals." While the Administration pledged that its program would reduce emissions by 18% over the next decade, "the General Accounting Office concluded that the plan would reduce overall emissions only 2% more than what the nation would achieve with no federal program whatsoever." BURYING THE SCIENCE: Along with the Kyoto rebuke, the Administration has sought to bury as much scientific data on the subject as possible. Earlier this year, the EPA "scrapped a detailed assessment of climate change from an upcoming report on the state of the environment after the White House directed major changes and deletions to emphasize the uncertainties surrounding global warming." The changes prompted an EPA staff memorandum that said the revisions demanded by the White House were so extensive that they would embarrass the agency because the section "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change.'" -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell Roedy Green Jan 8 2004, 11:45 pm show options Newsgroups: alt.impeach.bush From: Roedy Green > - Find messages by this author Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 03:45:41 GMT Local: Thurs, Jan 8 2004 11:45 pm Subject: Ignoring Global Warming Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:18:41 GMT, Tempest > wrote or quoted : >The problem is that key conservative lawmakers – >many of whom take huge sums of money from polluters who would be >affected by tougher environmental regulations - continue to ignore >scientific reality. They are also ignoring economic reality. Investing in cleaner energy SAVES money. This has been true of every cleanup done so far. The companies whine, but in the end, when they comply they discover they MAKE more money. -- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgl oss.html for The Java Glossary. Tempest Jan 8 2004, 11:59 pm show options Newsgroups: alt.impeach.bush From: Tempest > - Find messages by this author Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 03:59:06 GMT Local: Thurs, Jan 8 2004 11:59 pm Subject: Ignoring Global Warming Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse Roedy Green wrote: > On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:18:41 GMT, Tempest > wrote > or quoted : > >The problem is that key conservative lawmakers – > >many of whom take huge sums of money from polluters who would be > >affected by tougher environmental regulations - continue to ignore > >scientific reality. > They are also ignoring economic reality. Investing in cleaner energy > SAVES money. > This has been true of every cleanup done so far. Not anymore. Not since BushCo stopped making companies pay for cleaning up their messes and put the cost on the taxpayers. > The > companies whine, but in the end, when they comply they discover they > MAKE more money. > -- > Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. > Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming. > See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgl oss.html for The Java Glossary. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell Scented Nectar wrote: > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > .. . > >>Skanky Nutball wrote: >> >>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>> >>>>You don't, and you aren't. >> >>Established. > > > Why are you trying to reaffirm > something you already typed? > Are you trying to convince > yourself? > > >>>>>You cried >>>> >>>>No. >>> >>>Yes, >> >>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > > You never ask anything politely. > I'll make you a deal. You stop > calling me the sexist word ****, > and I'll stop calling you boy. I'll > bet you can't do it. Do as I say > but not as I do... > > >>>>>and whined >>>> >>>>No, I objected. >>>> >>>> >>>>>when I called you a boy >>>> >>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to >>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested >>>>development. >>> >>>Well, I'm glad >> >>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely >>self-crippling case of arrested development. >> >> >>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>that that you were black. >>>> >>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an >>>>interracial family. >>>> >>>>For example: >>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>> >>>Big ****ing deal. >> >>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > > > Lied about what? You pretending > that you found 'boy' offensive due > to feeling it was racist and thereby > implying you were black? Why are > sexist and other insults ok for you > to use but you can't take mild name > calling from the other side? > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>> >>>>You don't, and you aren't. >> >>Established. > > Why For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you don't have a car. >>>>>You cried >>>> >>>>No. >>> >>>Yes, >> >>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > You I objected and asked you politely to stop. > I'll make you a deal. I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic pot-heads. >>>>>and whined >>>> >>>>No, I objected. >>>> >>>>>when I called you a boy >>>> >>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to >>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested >>>>development. >>> >>>Well, I'm glad >> >>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely >>self-crippling case of arrested development. >> >> >>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>that that you were black. >>>> >>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an >>>>interracial family. >>>> >>>>For example: >>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>> >>>Big ****ing deal. >> >>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > > Lied Yes, you're a congenital liar. |
|
|||
|
|||
How come below, you don't put
in snip indicators? There's lots you've snipped. "usual suspect" > wrote in message ... > Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone > >>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > >>>> > >>>>You don't, and you aren't. > >> > >>Established. > > > > Why Why are you reassuring yourself of what you wrote? Trying to convince yourself? > > For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you > don't have a car. In 2003. Why are you fishing about now? > >>>>>You cried > >>>> > >>>>No. > >>> > >>>Yes, > >> > >>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > > > You > > I objected and asked you politely to stop. And I did, believing you were seeing a racist meaning rather than the maturity level one I meant. I hereby tell you that all my calling you boy is meant as a maturity insult. Keep this in mind if you see it again. You use sexist, sizist, homophobic political and religious insults to other people. I don't. > > I'll make you a deal. > > I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic > pot-heads. Why are you fishing about whether or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? How old are you? I can picture you searching through google to find the first and the most recent time I mentioned being 42. > >>>>>and whined > >>>> > >>>>No, I objected. > >>>> > >>>>>when I called you a boy > >>>> > >>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has to > >>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested > >>>>development. > >>> > >>>Well, I'm glad > >> > >>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely > >>self-crippling case of arrested development. > >> > >> > >>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by > >>>>>that that you were black. > >>>> > >>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from an > >>>>interracial family. > >>>> > >>>>For example: > >>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > >>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > >>> > >>>Big ****ing deal. > >> > >>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > > > > Lied > > Yes, you're a congenital liar. Whoa, major case of snip and run little boy. When are you enlisting, Useless? When are you going to answer the Usual Dinner Fare thread? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Scented Nectar wrote: > How come below, you don't put > in snip indicators? There's lots > you've snipped. > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > >>Skanky Nutball wrote: >> >>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>>>> >>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. >>>> >>>>Established. >>> >>>Why > > > Why are you reassuring yourself > of what you wrote? Trying to > convince yourself? > > >>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you >>don't have a car. > > > In 2003. Why are you fishing > about now? > > >>>>>>>You cried >>>>>> >>>>>>No. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, >>>> >>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>> >>>You >> >>I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > > And I did, believing you were > seeing a racist meaning rather > than the maturity level one I > meant. I hereby tell you that > all my calling you boy is meant > as a maturity insult. Keep this > in mind if you see it again. > You use sexist, sizist, homophobic > political and religious insults to > other people. I don't. > > >>>I'll make you a deal. >> >>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic >>pot-heads. > > > Why are you fishing about whether > or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? > How old are you? I can picture you > searching through google to find > the first and the most recent time I > mentioned being 42. > > >>>>>>>and whined >>>>>> >>>>>>No, I objected. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>when I called you a boy >>>>>> >>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has > > to > >>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested >>>>>>development. >>>>> >>>>>Well, I'm glad >>>> >>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely >>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>>>that that you were black. >>>>>> >>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from > > an > >>>>>>interracial family. >>>>>> >>>>>>For example: >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>>>> >>>>>Big ****ing deal. >>>> >>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. >>> >>>Lied >> >>Yes, you're a congenital liar. > > > Whoa, major case of snip and run > little boy. > > When are you enlisting, Useless? > > When are you going to answer the > Usual Dinner Fare thread? > > While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked pot his entire life. He was the first person to improvise around chords as opposed to the melody. It completely changed Jazz. His influence is heard in all forms of music. So you pick on a habit one person has. Louis Armstrong was an incredible genius that did something with his life. Unlike the junkies, he had a long, wonderful life. He was the first American to appear behind the Iron Curtain, and according to Arvill Shaw, his bass player, the first night not an American was there. It was so successful, the second night you couldn't get into the American section. Right after Lumungo was assassinated, there was a horrendous war in the Congo. He gave a 3 day concert in a soccer stadium built to seat 80,000. They STOPPED the war. Solders from both sides sat side by side. Imagine, a man capable of stopping a war. That man did more good will than all the ambassadors and diplomats combined. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
... > > > Scented Nectar wrote: > > How come below, you don't put > > in snip indicators? There's lots > > you've snipped. > > > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > > ... > > > >>Skanky Nutball wrote: > >> > >>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone > >>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. > >>>> > >>>>Established. > >>> > >>>Why > > > > > > Why are you reassuring yourself > > of what you wrote? Trying to > > convince yourself? > > > > > >>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you > >>don't have a car. > > > > > > In 2003. Why are you fishing > > about now? > > > > > >>>>>>>You cried > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No. > >>>>> > >>>>>Yes, > >>>> > >>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > >>> > >>>You > >> > >>I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > > > > > And I did, believing you were > > seeing a racist meaning rather > > than the maturity level one I > > meant. I hereby tell you that > > all my calling you boy is meant > > as a maturity insult. Keep this > > in mind if you see it again. > > You use sexist, sizist, homophobic > > political and religious insults to > > other people. I don't. > > > > > >>>I'll make you a deal. > >> > >>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic > >>pot-heads. > > > > > > Why are you fishing about whether > > or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? > > How old are you? I can picture you > > searching through google to find > > the first and the most recent time I > > mentioned being 42. > > > > > >>>>>>>and whined > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, I objected. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>when I called you a boy > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has > > > > to > > > >>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested > >>>>>>development. > >>>>> > >>>>>Well, I'm glad > >>>> > >>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely > >>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by > >>>>>>>that that you were black. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from > > > > an > > > >>>>>>interracial family. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For example: > >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > >>>>> > >>>>>Big ****ing deal. > >>>> > >>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > >>> > >>>Lied > >> > >>Yes, you're a congenital liar. > > > > > > Whoa, major case of snip and run > > little boy. > > > > When are you enlisting, Useless? > > > > When are you going to answer the > > Usual Dinner Fare thread? > > > > > While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis > Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked pot > his entire life. He was the first person to improvise around chords > as opposed to the melody. It completely changed Jazz. His influence is > heard in all forms of music. So you pick on a habit one person has. > Louis Armstrong was an incredible genius that did something with his life. > > Unlike the junkies, he had a long, wonderful life. The junkies tend to be people into harder drugs. I feel that if the mild ones are used responsibly they're ok. This means no working or driving while high and making sure that there is no one being forced to breathe in the second hand smoke unless they ok it. > He was the first American to appear behind the Iron Curtain, and > according to Arvill Shaw, his bass player, the first night not an > American was there. It was so successful, the second night you couldn't > get into the American section. > > Right after Lumungo was assassinated, there was a horrendous war in the > Congo. He gave a 3 day concert in a soccer stadium built to seat > 80,000. They STOPPED the war. Solders from both sides sat side by > side. Imagine, a man capable of stopping a war. > > That man did more good will than all the ambassadors and diplomats combined. I had no idea. That's quite something. In New Orleans once, I stayed in a hotel room marked the Louis Armstrong room. Not knowing much about him, I thought nothing of it at the time. After this though, I think I would have taken a picture of the door sign as one of my pics for that vacation. Maybe he stayed there once or something. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Scented Nectar wrote: > "Beach Runner" > wrote in message > ... > >> >>Scented Nectar wrote: >> >>>How come below, you don't put >>>in snip indicators? There's lots >>>you've snipped. >>> >>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message ... >>> >>> >>>>Skanky Nutball wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. >>>>>> >>>>>>Established. >>>>> >>>>>Why >>> >>> >>>Why are you reassuring yourself >>>of what you wrote? Trying to >>>convince yourself? >>> >>> >>> >>>>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you >>>>don't have a car. >>> >>> >>>In 2003. Why are you fishing >>>about now? >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>You cried >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes, >>>>>> >>>>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>>>> >>>>>You >>>> >>>>I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>> >>> >>>And I did, believing you were >>>seeing a racist meaning rather >>>than the maturity level one I >>>meant. I hereby tell you that >>>all my calling you boy is meant >>>as a maturity insult. Keep this >>>in mind if you see it again. >>>You use sexist, sizist, homophobic >>>political and religious insults to >>>other people. I don't. >>> >>> >>> >>>>>I'll make you a deal. >>>> >>>>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic >>>>pot-heads. >>> >>> >>>Why are you fishing about whether >>>or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? >>>How old are you? I can picture you >>>searching through google to find >>>the first and the most recent time I >>>mentioned being 42. >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>and whined >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No, I objected. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>when I called you a boy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege > > has > >>>to >>> >>> >>>>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of > > arrested > >>>>>>>>development. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Well, I'm glad >>>>>> >>>>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and > > severely > >>>>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>>>>>that that you were black. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come > > from > >>>an >>> >>> >>>>>>>>interracial family. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>For example: >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Big ****ing deal. >>>>>> >>>>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. >>>>> >>>>>Lied >>>> >>>>Yes, you're a congenital liar. >>> >>> >>>Whoa, major case of snip and run >>>little boy. >>> >>>When are you enlisting, Useless? >>> >>>When are you going to answer the >>>Usual Dinner Fare thread? >>> >>> >> >>While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis >>Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked pot >>his entire life. He was the first person to improvise around chords >>as opposed to the melody. It completely changed Jazz. His influence is >>heard in all forms of music. So you pick on a habit one person has. >>Louis Armstrong was an incredible genius that did something with his life. >> >>Unlike the junkies, he had a long, wonderful life. > > > The junkies tend to be people into > harder drugs. I feel that if the mild > ones are used responsibly they're > ok. This means no working or > driving while high and making > sure that there is no one being > forced to breathe in the second > hand smoke unless they ok it. > > >>He was the first American to appear behind the Iron Curtain, and >>according to Arvill Shaw, his bass player, the first night not an >>American was there. It was so successful, the second night you couldn't >>get into the American section. >> >>Right after Lumungo was assassinated, there was a horrendous war in the >>Congo. He gave a 3 day concert in a soccer stadium built to seat >>80,000. They STOPPED the war. Solders from both sides sat side by >>side. Imagine, a man capable of stopping a war. >> >>That man did more good will than all the ambassadors and diplomats > > combined. > > I had no idea. That's quite something. > In New Orleans once, I stayed in a > hotel room marked the Louis Armstrong > room. Not knowing much about him, > I thought nothing of it at the time. After > this though, I think I would have taken > a picture of the door sign as one of > my pics for that vacation. Maybe he > stayed there once or something. > > Don't get me wrong. I highly recommend people stop smoking or using pot. Just breathing hot dirty air is terrible for your lungs. There are carcinogenic elements in pot. And it isolates people. Worse, it is also a weapon that can destroy your life. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
... > > > Scented Nectar wrote: > > "Beach Runner" > wrote in message > > ... > > > >> > >>Scented Nectar wrote: > >> > >>>How come below, you don't put > >>>in snip indicators? There's lots > >>>you've snipped. > >>> > >>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > >>> > >>> > >>>>Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone > >>>>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Established. > >>>>> > >>>>>Why > >>> > >>> > >>>Why are you reassuring yourself > >>>of what you wrote? Trying to > >>>convince yourself? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you > >>>>don't have a car. > >>> > >>> > >>>In 2003. Why are you fishing > >>>about now? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>You cried > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>No. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Yes, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > >>>>> > >>>>>You > >>>> > >>>>I objected and asked you politely to stop. > >>> > >>> > >>>And I did, believing you were > >>>seeing a racist meaning rather > >>>than the maturity level one I > >>>meant. I hereby tell you that > >>>all my calling you boy is meant > >>>as a maturity insult. Keep this > >>>in mind if you see it again. > >>>You use sexist, sizist, homophobic > >>>political and religious insults to > >>>other people. I don't. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>>I'll make you a deal. > >>>> > >>>>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic > >>>>pot-heads. > >>> > >>> > >>>Why are you fishing about whether > >>>or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? > >>>How old are you? I can picture you > >>>searching through google to find > >>>the first and the most recent time I > >>>mentioned being 42. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>and whined > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>No, I objected. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>when I called you a boy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege > > > > has > > > >>>to > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of > > > > arrested > > > >>>>>>>>development. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Well, I'm glad > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and > > > > severely > > > >>>>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by > >>>>>>>>>that that you were black. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come > > > > from > > > >>>an > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>interracial family. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>For example: > >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Big ****ing deal. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > >>>>> > >>>>>Lied > >>>> > >>>>Yes, you're a congenital liar. > >>> > >>> > >>>Whoa, major case of snip and run > >>>little boy. > >>> > >>>When are you enlisting, Useless? > >>> > >>>When are you going to answer the > >>>Usual Dinner Fare thread? > >>> > >>> > >> > >>While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis > >>Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked pot > >>his entire life. He was the first person to improvise around chords > >>as opposed to the melody. It completely changed Jazz. His influence is > >>heard in all forms of music. So you pick on a habit one person has. > >>Louis Armstrong was an incredible genius that did something with his life. > >> > >>Unlike the junkies, he had a long, wonderful life. > > > > > > The junkies tend to be people into > > harder drugs. I feel that if the mild > > ones are used responsibly they're > > ok. This means no working or > > driving while high and making > > sure that there is no one being > > forced to breathe in the second > > hand smoke unless they ok it. > > > > > >>He was the first American to appear behind the Iron Curtain, and > >>according to Arvill Shaw, his bass player, the first night not an > >>American was there. It was so successful, the second night you couldn't > >>get into the American section. > >> > >>Right after Lumungo was assassinated, there was a horrendous war in the > >>Congo. He gave a 3 day concert in a soccer stadium built to seat > >>80,000. They STOPPED the war. Solders from both sides sat side by > >>side. Imagine, a man capable of stopping a war. > >> > >>That man did more good will than all the ambassadors and diplomats > > > > combined. > > > > I had no idea. That's quite something. > > In New Orleans once, I stayed in a > > hotel room marked the Louis Armstrong > > room. Not knowing much about him, > > I thought nothing of it at the time. After > > this though, I think I would have taken > > a picture of the door sign as one of > > my pics for that vacation. Maybe he > > stayed there once or something. > > > > > Don't get me wrong. I highly recommend people stop smoking or using pot. > Just breathing hot dirty air is terrible for your lungs. There are > carcinogenic elements in pot. And it isolates people. > > Worse, it is also a weapon that can destroy your life. In some cases for some people It can destroy their life, like if they are into the business side of it. This is all because it is illegal. As for isolation, it actually makes me more sociable, but I'm just a bit weird that way I guess. I agree though that it's not as good for the lungs as not smoking is. I've tried baking with it, but the effect is not as good, and it uses more, and the taste can be a little gross mixed into food. I don't believe it's a weapon in any sense, unless someone hits someone else with a huge brick of hash on the head. For me it's not an addiction but an enjoyable part of my life which includes many times when I am not smoking. Pot isn't always a bad thing. What do you think about people who drink but are not alcoholics? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
> How come below, you don't put > in snip indicators? First, your grammar is absolutely horrendous. One should ask "Why" rather than "How come." It's further evidence of your deficient, truncated education. Second, this is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. When the hell have YOU ever noted your rampant snips, Skanky? > There's lots you've snipped. And there's a lot more I should've since you've written nothing new. >>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>>>> >>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. >>>> >>>>Established. >>> >>>Why >> >>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you >>don't have a car. > > In 2003. In 2005, you've explained that you *cannot* lease or buy land further out near the city limits because of the inconvenience of travel, etc. It takes a bit longer by bus than by car (which you DON'T have), huh. I don't have time to travel to an out of the way part of the city just to water and weed every day. -- Skanky, 12 Jun 05: http://tinyurl.com/8zzxu Don't you think your chronic excuses will come back to haunt you if you continue to suggest that maybe NOW you do have one when all along you've used the transportation issue as a weasel point when discussing your pseudo-ethics and your reality? There is no fishing, Skanky. >>>>>>>You cried >>>>>> >>>>>>No. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, >>>> >>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>> >>>You >> >>I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > And I you've started up with that BS again. >>>I'll make you a deal. >> >>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic >>pot-heads. > > Why are you fishing about whether > or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? I'm not fishing. Your 42nd birthday marks the start of your 43rd year on earth. >>>>>>>and whined >>>>>> >>>>>>No, I objected. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>when I called you a boy >>>>>> >>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has > > to > >>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested >>>>>>development. >>>>> >>>>>Well, I'm glad >>>> >>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely >>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>>>that that you were black. >>>>>> >>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from > > an > >>>>>>interracial family. >>>>>> >>>>>>For example: >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>>>> >>>>>Big ****ing deal. >>>> >>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. >>> >>>Lied >> >>Yes, you're a congenital liar. > > Whoa, You should whoa yourself before you start lying, liar. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
news > Skanky wrote: > > How come below, you don't put > > in snip indicators? > > First, your grammar is absolutely horrendous. One should ask "Why" > rather than "How come." It's further evidence of your deficient, > truncated education. You and Rudey can't stop fishing, can you? > Second, this is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. When the > hell have YOU ever noted your rampant snips, Skanky? Except for early on in my posting to this group, I always notate my snips. Your faulty newsreader however is set up to not show anything below the sig. > > There's lots you've snipped. > > And there's a lot more I should've since you've written nothing new. > > >>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone > >>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. > >>>> > >>>>Established. > >>> > >>>Why > >> > >>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you > >>don't have a car. > > > > In 2003. > > In 2005, you've explained that you *cannot* lease or buy land further > out near the city limits because of the inconvenience of travel, etc. It > takes a bit longer by bus than by car (which you DON'T have), huh. You don't get it do you. With a car being out of town is still too inconvenient. We have a 24 hour rush hour here pretty much. Coming in and out of the city just isn't on my wishlist, nor is daily highway travel. Why are you so obsessed over who has a car? I saw in a post you did to Beachrunner that you thought his elderly father should not do the very good exercise that bike riding can give. > I don't have time to travel to an out of the way part > of the city just to water and weed every day. > -- Skanky, 12 Jun 05: http://tinyurl.com/8zzxu Yeah, I don't have time. What of it? Car or bus. Both take too much. > Don't you think your chronic excuses will come back to haunt you if you > continue to suggest that maybe NOW you do have one when all along you've > used the transportation issue as a weasel point when discussing your > pseudo-ethics and your reality? There is no fishing, Skanky. There's lots of fishing and insults. > >>>>>>>You cried > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No. > >>>>> > >>>>>Yes, > >>>> > >>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. > >>> > >>>You > >> > >>I objected and asked you politely to stop. > > > > And I > > you've started up with that BS again. Are you claiming that you find it a racist word still? And if so, why do you use sexist and sizeist etc. insults yourself? > >>>I'll make you a deal. > >> > >>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic > >>pot-heads. > > > > Why are you fishing about whether > > or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? > > I'm not fishing. Your 42nd birthday marks the start of your 43rd year on > earth. Hah, now you're trying to get out of it. > >>>>>>>and whined > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, I objected. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>when I called you a boy > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege has > > > > to > > > >>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of arrested > >>>>>>development. > >>>>> > >>>>>Well, I'm glad > >>>> > >>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and severely > >>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by > >>>>>>>that that you were black. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come from > > > > an > > > >>>>>>interracial family. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For example: > >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 > >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 > >>>>> > >>>>>Big ****ing deal. > >>>> > >>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. > >>> > >>>Lied > >> > >>Yes, you're a congenital liar. > > > > Whoa, > > You should whoa yourself before you start lying, liar. You're the liar, Useless Cesspool. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
> While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis > Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked pot > his entire life. Wrong. Not during infancy or childhood. > He was the first person to improvise around chords > as opposed to the melody. Which had NOTHING to do with his drug abuse. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
> I had no idea. You never did and you never shall because you're a home-bound agoraphobic pot-head with an eating disorder. |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
<...> > Don't get me wrong. I highly recommend people stop smoking or using pot. > Just breathing hot dirty air is terrible for your lungs. There are > carcinogenic elements in pot. Skanky doesn't care. > And it isolates people. Skanky is agoraphobic. Imagine that. > Worse, it is also a weapon that can destroy your life. Skanky's life is already utterly destroyed. |
|
|||
|
|||
Scented Nectar wrote:
>>Don't get me wrong. I highly recommend people stop smoking or using pot. >>Just breathing hot dirty air is terrible for your lungs. There are >>carcinogenic elements in pot. And it isolates people. >> >>Worse, it is also a weapon that can destroy your life. > > In some cases for some people You've pretty much ****ed up your life with it, Skanky. > It can destroy their life, like if they > are into the business side of it. No, it turns them into agoraphobic nitwits just like it did you. > This is all because it is illegal. No, you're wrong. Violent crime associated with distribution isn't the only way drugs ruin lives. Drugs create chemical dependency (as well as other forms of dependency through increased sloth, etc.) and ALTER behavior through their biochemical effects. Some of those effects wear off quickly, some -- like agoraphobia and similar disassociative disorders -- become more ingrained through chronic abuse. > As for isolation, it actually makes > me more sociable, No, you're agoraphobic. > I'm just a bit weird More than a bit. > What do you think about people who > drink but are not alcoholics? Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>How come below, you don't put >>>in snip indicators? >> >>First, your grammar is absolutely horrendous. One should ask "Why" >>rather than "How come." It's further evidence of your deficient, >>truncated education. > > You and Rudey can't stop fishing, > can you? That, Skanky, isn't fishing. It's an observation. >>Second, this is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. When the >>hell have YOU ever noted your rampant snips, Skanky? > > Except for early on in my posting > to this group, I always notate my > snips. Liar. >>>There's lots you've snipped. >> >>And there's a lot more I should've since you've written nothing new. >> >> >>>>>>>>>If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>>>>>claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You don't, and you aren't. >>>>>> >>>>>>Established. >>>>> >>>>>Why >>>> >>>>For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you >>>>don't have a car. >>> >>>In 2003. >> >>In 2005, you've explained that you *cannot* lease or buy land further >>out near the city limits because of the inconvenience of travel, etc. It >>takes a bit longer by bus than by car (which you DON'T have), huh. > > You don't Wrong, *you* don't have a car. > I saw in a post you did Did? I "wrote." >>I don't have time to travel to an out of the way part >>of the city just to water and weed every day. >>-- Skanky, 12 Jun 05: http://tinyurl.com/8zzxu > > Yeah, I don't have time. What of it? > Car or bus. Both take too much. You have a bus pass. You don't have a car. >>Don't you think your chronic excuses will come back to haunt you if you >>continue to suggest that maybe NOW you do have one when all along you've >>used the transportation issue as a weasel point when discussing your >>pseudo-ethics and your reality? There is no fishing, Skanky. > > There's lots of fishing and insults. Neither. >>>>>>>>>You cried >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes, >>>>>> >>>>>>No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>>>> >>>>>You >>>> >>>>I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>> >>>And I >> >>you've started up with that BS again. > > Are you When will you stop? >>>>>I'll make you a deal. >>>> >>>>I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic >>>>pot-heads. >>> >>>Why are you fishing about whether >>>or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? >> >>I'm not fishing. Your 42nd birthday marks the start of your 43rd year on >>earth. > > Hah, now you're trying to get out > of it. I was never "in" it. I don't care about your birthdate. I know how old you claim to be within a period of a few months. >>>>>>>>>and whined >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No, I objected. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>when I called you a boy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege > > has > >>>to >>> >>> >>>>>>>>do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of > > arrested > >>>>>>>>development. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Well, I'm glad >>>>>> >>>>>>You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and > > severely > >>>>>>self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>>>>>that that you were black. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come > > from > >>>an >>> >>> >>>>>>>>interracial family. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>For example: >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Big ****ing deal. >>>>>> >>>>>>It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. >>>>> >>>>>Lied >>>> >>>>Yes, you're a congenital liar. >>> >>>Whoa, >> >>You should whoa yourself before you start lying, liar. > > You're I'm calling you on your lies, Skanky. You should stop lying. |
|
|||
|
|||
> > Except for early on in my posting
> > to this group, I always notate my > > snips. > > Liar. I wasn't lying. But starting this around now, I will snip whatever the **** I want from your posts all without notating. I will treat people who snip and run with their own medicine. > I'm calling you a teller of truths. See? Sometimes I will now do this. From here on. Sometimes I won't be bothered to, but other times I will. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
> > What do you think about people who
> > drink but are not alcoholics? > > Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. The topic was me smoking weed. I am now comparing views with a comparable drug, alcohol. Some people are consistent in their views on both, but some have conflicting views. Ok with you Useless Cesspool? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
> Skanky's life is already utterly destroyed.
My life is quite nice. Why do you wish such misanthropist things on your fellow humans? The way you state these wishes as facts only shows how hard you're trying to convince yourself and others. Are other fish eaters as hateful as you? You're now what some people would call a pesco-vegetarian I think it is. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
usual suspect wrote: > Skanky wrote: > >> I had no idea. > > > You never did and you never shall because you're a home-bound > agoraphobic pot-head with an eating disorder. That's because the history of jazz has been written by racists. Imagine. the Original Dixie Land Band, all white was a African American copy band, yet claimed to have invented "Jazz" music. I have some time maybe I'll go into the research on the subject. You will not find another musician in African American Culture that makes up new melodies based on chords before Armstrong. Bix Biderdex says Louis's solos seem easy until you try to play them. I'm not saying he shouldn't give up pot, but certainly it didn't make the most influential musician of America less significant. |
|
|||
|
|||
usual suspect wrote: > Beach Runner wrote: > >> While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, Louis >> Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, smoked >> pot his entire life. > > > Wrong. Not during infancy or childhood. > >> He was the first person to improvise around chords as opposed to the >> melody. > > > Which had NOTHING to do with his drug abuse. Not according to him. Many jazz musicians says it helped their creativity. Are you an expert on Louis Armstrong. I am. It includes interviews with his co workers, including Arvil Shaw and Warren Smith. |
|
|||
|
|||
usual suspect wrote: > Skanky wrote: > >> How come below, you don't put >> in snip indicators? > > > First, your grammar is absolutely horrendous. One should ask "Why" > rather than "How come." It's further evidence of your deficient, > truncated education. > > Second, this is an example of the pot calling the kettle black. When the > hell have YOU ever noted your rampant snips, Skanky? > >> There's lots you've snipped. > > > And there's a lot more I should've since you've written nothing new. > >>>>>>>> If I had a penny for every time someone >>>>>>>> claimed to be part Indian...I'd be rich. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You don't, and you aren't. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Established. >>>> >>>> >>>> Why >>> >>> >>> For starters, because you've explained how you take the bus because you >>> don't have a car. >> >> >> In 2003. > > > In 2005, you've explained that you *cannot* lease or buy land further > out near the city limits because of the inconvenience of travel, etc. It > takes a bit longer by bus than by car (which you DON'T have), huh. > > I don't have time to travel to an out of the way part > of the city just to water and weed every day. > -- Skanky, 12 Jun 05: http://tinyurl.com/8zzxu > > Don't you think your chronic excuses will come back to haunt you if you > continue to suggest that maybe NOW you do have one when all along you've > used the transportation issue as a weasel point when discussing your > pseudo-ethics and your reality? There is no fishing, Skanky. > >>>>>>>> You cried >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No. I objected and asked you politely to stop. >>>> >>>> >>>> You >>> >>> >>> I objected and asked you politely to stop. >> >> >> And I > > > you've started up with that BS again. > >>>> I'll make you a deal. >>> >>> >>> I don't make deals with 43 year-old arrested development agoraphobic >>> pot-heads. >> >> >> Why are you fishing about whether >> or not I've had my 43rd birthday yet? > > > I'm not fishing. Your 42nd birthday marks the start of your 43rd year on > earth. > >>>>>>>> and whined >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I objected. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> when I called you a boy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Awfully rich for you to call someone else a name which you allege >>>>>>> has >> >> >> to >> >>>>>>> do with maturity considering your own self-crippling case of >>>>>>> arrested >>>>>>> development. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, I'm glad >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You shouldn't take comfort in your own emotional immaturity and >>>>> severely >>>>> self-crippling case of arrested development. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> saying it was racist, and indicating by >>>>>>>> that that you were black. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I didn't say I was black. I've never claimed to be black. I come >>>>>>> from >> >> >> an >> >>>>>>> interracial family. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example: >>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/aojn6 >>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/9tau4 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Big ****ing deal. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It is because you've once again brazenly lied about this whole issue. >>>> >>>> >>>> Lied >>> >>> >>> Yes, you're a congenital liar. >> >> >> Whoa, > > > You should whoa yourself before you start lying, liar. Even you make typos. He's not perfect. And obviously you're not. |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote: > > > usual suspect wrote: > >> Beach Runner wrote: >> >>> While I'm not in favor of smoking pot due to the hot dirty air, >>> Louis Armstrong, the most influential musician of the 20th century, >>> smoked pot his entire life. >> OK, his entire Adult life. I thought that should be obvious to anyone reading it. >> >> >> Wrong. Not during infancy or childhood. >> >>> He was the first person to improvise around chords as opposed to the >>> melody. >> >> >> >> Which had NOTHING to do with his drug abuse. > > > Not according to him. Many jazz musicians says it helped their > creativity. Are you an expert on Louis Armstrong. I am. It includes > interviews with his co workers, including Arvil Shaw and Warren Smith. |
|
|||
|
|||
car-less pot-head Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>Except for early on in my posting >>>to this group, I always notate my >>>snips. >> >>Liar. > > I was You still are. |
|
|||
|
|||
car-less jelly-head Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>Skanky's life is already utterly destroyed. > > My life is quite a mess. |
|
|||
|
|||
car-less agoraphobic orthorexic pot-head Skanky wrote:
>>>What do you think about people who >>>drink but are not alcoholics? >> >>Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. > > The topic was me smoking weed. Stick to that topic. |
|
|||
|
|||
Beach Runner wrote:
>> You should whoa yourself before you start lying, liar. > > Even you make typos. She lied, typos or no. > He's not perfect. She's definitely not. For starters, she's abused her body and mind with marijuana for decades. She also has cankles, Bob. She's a mess. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > car-less agoraphobic orthorexic pot-head Skanky wrote: > >>>What do you think about people who > >>>drink but are not alcoholics? > >> > >>Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. > > > > The topic was me smoking weed. > > Stick to that topic. Topics evolve. So should you. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
car-less agoraphobic orthorexic pot-head Skanky wrote:
>> >>>>>What do you think about people who >>>>>drink but are not alcoholics? >>>> >>>>Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. >>> >>>The topic was me smoking weed. >> >>Stick to that topic. > > Topics Topic. Singular. Stick to it. |
|
|||
|
|||
-- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ "usual suspect" > wrote in message .. . > car-less agoraphobic orthorexic pot-head Skanky wrote: > >> > >>>>>What do you think about people who > >>>>>drink but are not alcoholics? > >>>> > >>>>Stop trying to change the subject, Skanky. > >>> > >>>The topic was me smoking weed. > >> > >>Stick to that topic. > > > > Topics > > Topic. Singular. Stick to it. Then get back to global warming moron. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Global Warming | General Cooking | |||
Global Warming | General Cooking | |||
Global Warming | General Cooking | |||
Global Warming | Vegan | |||
Global Warming | Vegan |