|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 22, 2011 10:21:03 GMT 1
It certainly was not thanks to any contributions from you, alan. Why do you haunt this place, by the way? Stick to what you're good at, ol' pal - smut and wordplay - but somewhere else, please.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Jan 22, 2011 10:26:12 GMT 1
It certainly was not thanks to any contributions from you, alan. Why do you haunt this place, by the way? Stick to what you're good at, ol' pal - smut and wordplay - but somewhere else, eh? ;D Worth repeating MR!
|
|
|
Post by alanseago on Jan 23, 2011 14:54:12 GMT 1
I have shown you mine. Now show us yours.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 23, 2011 16:09:45 GMT 1
Thank you for sharing your "dream home" with us alan. Are you a fan of Barbara Cartland?
|
|
|
Post by louise on Jan 23, 2011 19:41:01 GMT 1
She is unaware of the myriad "anthropogenic" influneces on climate in which Pielke Sr and Jr are expert but assumes anthropogenic refers only to CO2. You have no reason to suppose this - it is not true. Personal attacks are a sure indication of somebody 'lowering the one'. I have not done this (unlike you). I have posted interesting information that can readily be checked for its accuracy as I do give the links to its source. Once again, you accuse me of lowering the tone of the board - please show me where I have done either this, or your other accusation of insulting your intelligence. I post information that I think others who visit a science board might find interesting - you seem to think that views that differ from yours should not be tolerated. I am not attempting to restrict what you post, I hope for the same courtesy from you.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 23, 2011 20:27:34 GMT 1
I think she means you simply post low level warmist propaganda. We're way past that nonsense - it's so last year.
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Jan 24, 2011 14:33:30 GMT 1
So, no actual EVIDENCE then M.
Actually, the description fits you better than Louise, and we have abundant evidence to back up that estimation.
But might I suggest that a decent moderator would severely chastise M for these repeated insults and attempted slurs --except that isn't what we seem to be getting here, where certain posters seem to be able to say what the heck they like without any censure, whereas when I do such a thing as calling M M, I get ticked off....................
Is it just me that thinks these boards are just a big pile of poo? And the ONLY reason I keep going is because if we don't, the idiots and misinformation merchants will have it all their own way, and be free to spread whatever nonsense they like, with the excuse that since it is a public discussion board, IF it wasn't true someone would have posted something to contradict it, and since they don't.......................
|
|
|
Post by carnyx on Jan 24, 2011 15:51:59 GMT 1
STA .. this is great! Wothy of the great Crapaud Triste himself!
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 24, 2011 17:54:33 GMT 1
So, no actual EVIDENCE then M. Actually, the description fits you better than Louise, and we have abundant evidence to back up that estimation. But might I suggest that a decent moderator would severely chastise M for these repeated insults and attempted slurs --except that isn't what we seem to be getting here, where certain posters seem to be able to say what the heck they like without any censure, whereas when I do such a thing as calling M M, I get ticked off.................... Is it just me that thinks these boards are just a big pile of poo? And the ONLY reason I keep going is because if we don't, the idiots and misinformation merchants will have it all their own way, and be free to spread whatever nonsense they like, with the excuse that since it is a public discussion board, IF it wasn't true someone would have posted something to contradict it, and since they don't....................... I'm sure you would rather the biased BBC moderators and unbridled cat-peeing of old. I see 360 jobs going from BBC online. Good.
|
|
|
Post by louise on Jan 24, 2011 19:37:58 GMT 1
From what I have read, this message board is very heavily moderated. There appear to be several posters who have been banned.
None of these seem to have been from the AGW skeptic community yet, again from what I have read, those (AGW skeptic) folk do seem to be the most punacious.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 24, 2011 22:52:47 GMT 1
"Is it just me that thinks these boards are just a big pile of poo? And the ONLY reason I keep going is......."
You just lurve to roll in the ordure?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 24, 2011 22:58:22 GMT 1
So the warmists around here are a bit miffed that they don't call the shots anymore, as they did on the Beeb, where any mean spirited prat could get posts pulled for any of umpteen catch-all reasons devised by the beeb precisely to permit their fellow travellers to rule the roost.
Aaaaw! Didums doesn't like it? Diddums going home to play with lovely louise and lovely helen instead!
Tara!
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Jan 25, 2011 2:17:35 GMT 1
Careful there M, you're showing your true colours, and I don't think anyone sensible is going to think your remarks are either big or clever.
Still no evidence then? Why am I not surprised? Who needs evidence when insults and attempted character assasination are SO much easier! Although you did at least have to type, and couldn't just cut & paste en masse.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 25, 2011 9:58:54 GMT 1
I have ALWAYS "showed my true colours, speaker". No pretense here! What you see is what you get with the marchesa.
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Jan 25, 2011 14:51:31 GMT 1
Yep, concerted disregard for any actual evidence -- glad you agree with me!
Or perhaps now you will explain why you keep making these claims about various posters.................................
|
|