Climate Change - The Scientific Debate - Vol II

Climate Change - The Scientific Debate - Vol II

Author
Discussion

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl
Nope, it's you banging out endless vacous posts on these threads with just "97% of scientists believe"... Bit of an endless echo, tbh.

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl
Nope, it's you banging out endless vacous posts on these threads with just "97% of scientists believe"... Bit of an endless echo, tbh.
Whilst your nodding emojis in agreement when a denier claims the models are all bks are full of insight and intrigue. hehe

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl
Nope, it's you banging out endless vacous posts on these threads with just "97% of scientists believe"... Bit of an endless echo, tbh.
Whilst your nodding emojis in agreement when a denier claims the models are all bks are full of insight and intrigue. hehe
Please, make that repetetive droning noise stop! Denier this, denier that. Get a hobby....oh, wait, this is it, right? nuts

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl
Nope, it's you banging out endless vacous posts on these threads with just "97% of scientists believe"... Bit of an endless echo, tbh.
Whilst your nodding emojis in agreement when a denier claims the models are all bks are full of insight and intrigue. hehe
Please, make that repetetive droning noise stop! Denier this, denier that. Get a hobby....oh, wait, this is it, right? nuts
I've just seen your last post on the thread where you are all beating up a teenage girl...it's another riveting ROFL to somebody's meme.

hehe

kerplunk

3,863 posts

154 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
You forgot they tried to sue a couplee of old age pensioners to keep it under the table. Something to hide then?
You know who wrote that article and what his beliefs were right?

Man walked with Dinosaurs....earth only 6,000 years old. laugh

Why is it all of the deniers links end up at some crackpot or other?
No matter what you post/write, it's a fact. Keep swerving though, and/or head in the sand

Who were the SECRET 28 who ended all climate debate at the BBC?

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/29/boaden_tr...

Row over BBC climate change conference 'cover up'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc...

The 'secret' list of the BBC 28 is now public – let's call it 'TwentyEightGate'

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/12/breaking-th...

BBC secret exposed: Greenpeace, activists, BP decide what “science” brits see — Hello TwentyEightGate

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/11/bbc-secret-expose...

Shall I stop now ?
"Keep swerving"? hehe

I'm not swerving at all.

I'm glad the BBC used pro AGW advocates to help form policy.

If the been are reporting on Brain Surgery I don't want to hear what a homeopath thinks about the subject I want to hear what Brain Surgeons have to say.

You make it sound like it should be a level playing field. That's nonsense.

HTH.
Try justifying the BBC stance, instead of waffling like a politician who's been nailed to the spot. What I posted is a FACT. Have you forgotten the BBC is supposed to be unbiased, it's in their charter? How about if they only decide to promote Conservative Election manifesto stuff for the coming election?

Edited by robinessex on Thursday 14th November 15:00
Well let's at least see the 'BBC stance' that resulted from that seminar that is allegedly being 'covered up'.

It's freely available in the BBC Trust's 2007 report on impartiality - an 81 page document - but the part devoted to climate change is just this:


"Climate change is another subject where dissenters can be unpopular. There may be now a broad scientific consensus that climate change is definitely happening, and that it is at least predominantly man-made. But the second part of that consensus still has some intelligent and articulate opponents, even if a small minority.

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus. But these dissenters (or even sceptics) will still be heard, as they should, because it is not the BBC’s role to close down this debate. They cannot be simply dismissed as ‘flat-earthers’ or ‘deniers’, who ‘should not be given a platform’ by the BBC. Impartiality always requires a breadth of view: for as long as minority opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space. ‘Bias by elimination’ is even more offensive today than it was in 1926. The BBC has many public purposes of both ambition and merit – but joining campaigns to save the planet is not one of them. The BBC’s best contribution is to increase public awareness of the issues and possible solutions through impartial and accurate programming. Acceptance of a basic scientific consensus only sharpens the need for hawk-eyed scrutiny of the arguments surrounding both causation and solution. It remains important that programme-makers relish the full range of debate that such a central and absorbing subject offers, scientifically, politically and ethically, and avoid being misrepresented as standard-bearers. "

Shocking!

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/p...

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
You know he has loads of free time on his hands and is just trolling the climate threads, right? Like WOTF and Zyggy, there's nothing to his posts except repetition, endless insults and 99%/97%. He finds it funny, but is not here to have his (or the others) mind(s) changed.

Just sayin...
There's nothing in you or any off your fellow armchair climate experts posts to change the mind of anybody...who do you think you are?

Try changing the minds of a few scientists or institutions and MAYBE I'll sit up. But you can't do that can you.

As for trolling I'm afraid it's you that's trolling the planet arguing against mainstream climate science and for the cult position.
Troll Triggered! rofl
It's not me running around like a headless chicken trying to convince the world or rather PH the scientists have got it all wrong rofl
Nope, it's you banging out endless vacous posts on these threads with just "97% of scientists believe"... Bit of an endless echo, tbh.
Whilst your nodding emojis in agreement when a denier claims the models are all bks are full of insight and intrigue. hehe
Please, make that repetetive droning noise stop! Denier this, denier that. Get a hobby....oh, wait, this is it, right? nuts
I've just seen your last post on the thread where you are all beating up a teenage girl...it's another riveting ROFL to somebody's meme.

hehe
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle

robinessex

7,543 posts

129 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
kerplunk said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
You forgot they tried to sue a couplee of old age pensioners to keep it under the table. Something to hide then?
You know who wrote that article and what his beliefs were right?

Man walked with Dinosaurs....earth only 6,000 years old. laugh

Why is it all of the deniers links end up at some crackpot or other?
No matter what you post/write, it's a fact. Keep swerving though, and/or head in the sand

Who were the SECRET 28 who ended all climate debate at the BBC?

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/29/boaden_tr...

Row over BBC climate change conference 'cover up'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc...

The 'secret' list of the BBC 28 is now public – let's call it 'TwentyEightGate'

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/12/breaking-th...

BBC secret exposed: Greenpeace, activists, BP decide what “science” brits see — Hello TwentyEightGate

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/11/bbc-secret-expose...

Shall I stop now ?
"Keep swerving"? hehe

I'm not swerving at all.

I'm glad the BBC used pro AGW advocates to help form policy.

If the been are reporting on Brain Surgery I don't want to hear what a homeopath thinks about the subject I want to hear what Brain Surgeons have to say.

You make it sound like it should be a level playing field. That's nonsense.

HTH.
Try justifying the BBC stance, instead of waffling like a politician who's been nailed to the spot. What I posted is a FACT. Have you forgotten the BBC is supposed to be unbiased, it's in their charter? How about if they only decide to promote Conservative Election manifesto stuff for the coming election?

Edited by robinessex on Thursday 14th November 15:00
Well let's at least see the 'BBC stance' that resulted from that seminar that is allegedly being 'covered up'.

It's freely available in the BBC Trust's 2007 report on impartiality - an 81 page document - but the part devoted to climate change is just this:


"Climate change is another subject where dissenters can be unpopular. There may be now a broad scientific consensus that climate change is definitely happening, and that it is at least predominantly man-made. But the second part of that consensus still has some intelligent and articulate opponents, even if a small minority.

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus. But these dissenters (or even sceptics) will still be heard, as they should, because it is not the BBC’s role to close down this debate. They cannot be simply dismissed as ‘flat-earthers’ or ‘deniers’, who ‘should not be given a platform’ by the BBC. Impartiality always requires a breadth of view: for as long as minority opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space. ‘Bias by elimination’ is even more offensive today than it was in 1926. The BBC has many public purposes of both ambition and merit – but joining campaigns to save the planet is not one of them. The BBC’s best contribution is to increase public awareness of the issues and possible solutions through impartial and accurate programming. Acceptance of a basic scientific consensus only sharpens the need for hawk-eyed scrutiny of the arguments surrounding both causation and solution. It remains important that programme-makers relish the full range of debate that such a central and absorbing subject offers, scientifically, politically and ethically, and avoid being misrepresented as standard-bearers. "

Shocking!

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/p...
Exclusive: BBC issues internal guidance on how to report climate change

"What’s the BBC’s position?

Man-made climate change exists: If the science proves it we should report it. The BBC accepts that the best science on the issue is the IPCC’s position, set out above.

Be aware of ‘false balance’: AS CLIMATE CHANGE IS ACCEPTED AS HAPPENING, YOU DO NOT NEED A ‘DENIER’ TO BALANCE THE DEBATE. Although there are those who disagree with the IPCC’s position, very few of them now go so far as to deny that climate change is happening. TO ACHIEVE IMPARTIALITY, YOU DO NOT NEED TO INCLUDE OUTRIGHT DENIERS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN BBC COVERAGE, in the same way you would not have someone denying that Manchester United won 2-0 last Saturday. The referee has spoken. However, the BBC does not exclude any shade of opinion from its output, and with appropriate challenge from a knowledgeable interviewer, there may be occasions to hear from a denier.

There are occasions where contrarians and sceptics should be included within climate change and sustainability debates. These may include, for instance, debating the speed and intensity of what will happen in the future, or what policies government should adopt. Again, journalists need to be aware of the guest’s viewpoint and how to challenge it effectively. As with all topics, we must make clear to the audience which organisation the speaker represents, potentially how that group is funded and whether they are speaking with authority from a scientific perspective – in short, making their affiliations and previously expressed opinions clear."

My capitals

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle
"Pats Gadgetmac on the head with no condescension.." There's an emoji for that...like you didn't know biggrin

Quick, Greta hasn't been abused for at least 1/2 an hour....now that's REAL input.

kerplunk

3,863 posts

154 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
robinessex said:
kerplunk said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
You forgot they tried to sue a couplee of old age pensioners to keep it under the table. Something to hide then?
You know who wrote that article and what his beliefs were right?

Man walked with Dinosaurs....earth only 6,000 years old. laugh

Why is it all of the deniers links end up at some crackpot or other?
No matter what you post/write, it's a fact. Keep swerving though, and/or head in the sand

Who were the SECRET 28 who ended all climate debate at the BBC?

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/29/boaden_tr...

Row over BBC climate change conference 'cover up'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc...

The 'secret' list of the BBC 28 is now public – let's call it 'TwentyEightGate'

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/12/breaking-th...

BBC secret exposed: Greenpeace, activists, BP decide what “science” brits see — Hello TwentyEightGate

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/11/bbc-secret-expose...

Shall I stop now ?
"Keep swerving"? hehe

I'm not swerving at all.

I'm glad the BBC used pro AGW advocates to help form policy.

If the been are reporting on Brain Surgery I don't want to hear what a homeopath thinks about the subject I want to hear what Brain Surgeons have to say.

You make it sound like it should be a level playing field. That's nonsense.

HTH.
Try justifying the BBC stance, instead of waffling like a politician who's been nailed to the spot. What I posted is a FACT. Have you forgotten the BBC is supposed to be unbiased, it's in their charter? How about if they only decide to promote Conservative Election manifesto stuff for the coming election?

Edited by robinessex on Thursday 14th November 15:00
Well let's at least see the 'BBC stance' that resulted from that seminar that is allegedly being 'covered up'.

It's freely available in the BBC Trust's 2007 report on impartiality - an 81 page document - but the part devoted to climate change is just this:


"Climate change is another subject where dissenters can be unpopular. There may be now a broad scientific consensus that climate change is definitely happening, and that it is at least predominantly man-made. But the second part of that consensus still has some intelligent and articulate opponents, even if a small minority.

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus. But these dissenters (or even sceptics) will still be heard, as they should, because it is not the BBC’s role to close down this debate. They cannot be simply dismissed as ‘flat-earthers’ or ‘deniers’, who ‘should not be given a platform’ by the BBC. Impartiality always requires a breadth of view: for as long as minority opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space. ‘Bias by elimination’ is even more offensive today than it was in 1926. The BBC has many public purposes of both ambition and merit – but joining campaigns to save the planet is not one of them. The BBC’s best contribution is to increase public awareness of the issues and possible solutions through impartial and accurate programming. Acceptance of a basic scientific consensus only sharpens the need for hawk-eyed scrutiny of the arguments surrounding both causation and solution. It remains important that programme-makers relish the full range of debate that such a central and absorbing subject offers, scientifically, politically and ethically, and avoid being misrepresented as standard-bearers. "

Shocking!

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/p...
Exclusive: BBC issues internal guidance on how to report climate change

"What’s the BBC’s position?

Man-made climate change exists: If the science proves it we should report it. The BBC accepts that the best science on the issue is the IPCC’s position, set out above.

Be aware of ‘false balance’: AS CLIMATE CHANGE IS ACCEPTED AS HAPPENING, YOU DO NOT NEED A ‘DENIER’ TO BALANCE THE DEBATE. Although there are those who disagree with the IPCC’s position, very few of them now go so far as to deny that climate change is happening. TO ACHIEVE IMPARTIALITY, YOU DO NOT NEED TO INCLUDE OUTRIGHT DENIERS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN BBC COVERAGE, in the same way you would not have someone denying that Manchester United won 2-0 last Saturday. The referee has spoken. However, the BBC does not exclude any shade of opinion from its output, and with appropriate challenge from a knowledgeable interviewer, there may be occasions to hear from a denier.

There are occasions where contrarians and sceptics should be included within climate change and sustainability debates. These may include, for instance, debating the speed and intensity of what will happen in the future, or what policies government should adopt. Again, journalists need to be aware of the guest’s viewpoint and how to challenge it effectively. As with all topics, we must make clear to the audience which organisation the speaker represents, potentially how that group is funded and whether they are speaking with authority from a scientific perspective – in short, making their affiliations and previously expressed opinions clear."

My capitals
What about it? I've already seen it and concur with it.


kerplunk

3,863 posts

154 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Good to see what you self-identify as anyway - "OUTRIGHT DENIERS OF CLIMATE CHANGE"

(your capitals)

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle
"Pats Gadgetmac on the head with no condescension.." There's an emoji for that...like you didn't know biggrin

Quick, Greta hasn't been abused for at least 1/2 an hour....now that's REAL input.
I suspect you're trolling posting on so many climate threads that you're losing sight of which one's which... rotate

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle
"Pats Gadgetmac on the head with no condescension.." There's an emoji for that...like you didn't know biggrin

Quick, Greta hasn't been abused for at least 1/2 an hour....now that's REAL input.
I suspect you're trolling posting on so many climate threads that you're losing sight of which one's which... rotate
Oh good, you found the strikethrough formating tool...now if you can just muster something worth reading you're on your way!

thumbup

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle
"Pats Gadgetmac on the head with no condescension.." There's an emoji for that...like you didn't know biggrin

Quick, Greta hasn't been abused for at least 1/2 an hour....now that's REAL input.
I suspect you're trolling posting on so many climate threads that you're losing sight of which one's which... rotate
Oh good, you found the strikethrough formating tool...now if you can just muster something worth reading you're on your way!

thumbup
Trolling followed by projecting. Very good, carry on...

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Oh, right, erm, well done you! Good effort, that really showed me. thumbup

>Pats Gadgetmac gently on the head with no condescencion intended< whistle
"Pats Gadgetmac on the head with no condescension.." There's an emoji for that...like you didn't know biggrin

Quick, Greta hasn't been abused for at least 1/2 an hour....now that's REAL input.
I suspect you're trolling posting on so many climate threads that you're losing sight of which one's which... rotate
Oh good, you found the strikethrough formating tool...now if you can just muster something worth reading you're on your way!

thumbup
Trolling followed by projecting. Very good, carry on...
Here, take out your frustrations on this...use it as a verbal pinata...



Then, later this evening, you can use up all of your stored emojis on here after the BBC4 program on Climategate has aired.

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
Here, take out your frustrations on this...use it as a verbal pinata...



Then, later this evening, you can use up all of your stored emojis on here after the BBC4 program on Climategate has aired.
'kin ell, mate! You've developed an unhealthy obsession with that vulnerable, exploited child. Step back for your own sake as you're looking really quite creepy now...

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
Here, take out your frustrations on this...use it as a verbal pinata...



Then, later this evening, you can use up all of your stored emojis on here after the BBC4 program on Climategate has aired.
'kin ell, mate! You've developed an unhealthy obsession with that vulnerable, exploited child. Step back for your own sake as you're looking really quite creepy now...
Not half as creepy as you laughing at jokes about a teenage girl with mental issues.

Triggered much?

Whatever floats your boat I suppose.

jshell

9,112 posts

153 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
Here, take out your frustrations on this...use it as a verbal pinata...



Then, later this evening, you can use up all of your stored emojis on here after the BBC4 program on Climategate has aired.
'kin ell, mate! You've developed an unhealthy obsession with that vulnerable, exploited child. Step back for your own sake as you're looking really quite creepy now...
Not half as creepy as you laughing at jokes about a teenage girl with mental issues.

Triggered much?

Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
Laughing at a meme is one thing but you keep posting pictures of Greta and inviting acts of violence towards her. I'm not triggered, I'm creeped out by your obsession now with vulnerable teenagers and physical abuse.

Keep posting, but I'm out and won't be responding to you on climate threads. I suspect others may not either...

Gadgetmac

6,625 posts

56 months

Thursday 14th November
quotequote all
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
Here, take out your frustrations on this...use it as a verbal pinata...



Then, later this evening, you can use up all of your stored emojis on here after the BBC4 program on Climategate has aired.
'kin ell, mate! You've developed an unhealthy obsession with that vulnerable, exploited child. Step back for your own sake as you're looking really quite creepy now...
Not half as creepy as you laughing at jokes about a teenage girl with mental issues.

Triggered much?

Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
Laughing at a meme is one thing but you keep posting pictures of Greta and inviting acts of violence towards her. I'm not triggered, I'm creeped out by your obsession now with vulnerable teenagers and physical abuse.

Keep posting, but I'm out and won't be responding to you on climate threads. I suspect others may not either...
Yeah, I’m not surprised you’re out, the Greta thread seems to be dying on its arse so you’ll need to get back and kick start it with some more of your outstanding wit and roffles.