Guest alex Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 18017 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 That thread "Does science exist?" was the most moronic I have ever seen tbh. Don't think I bothered with General Chat on N-O again following that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... I know that sounds a bit sad. You know me well enough Alex ffs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invicta_Toon 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Edited January 17, 2007 by Invicta_Toon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 That thread "Does science exist?" was the most moronic I have ever seen tbh. Don't think I bothered with General Chat on N-O again following that. I thought it was a lot of light hearted fun acutally. But each to their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35373 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... This post brought to you by Disney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invicta_Toon 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... This post brought to you by Disney. lovely mental picture of Parky trying to fight off a T-Rex with platitudes about the beautiful planet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... This post brought to you by Disney. Heartless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... This post brought to you by Disney. lovely mental picture of Parky trying to fight off a T-Rex with platitudes about the beautiful planet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35373 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I think Parky was best summed up on N-O when obagol/dotbum/tbh asked him (something along the lines of): Are you going to post anything of substance or are you just going to keep making allusions to your vast intelligence? Pwned tbh It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway. You've just proved his point tbh. It's a play on Nietzsche. I didn't realise that but you were basically saying how much cleverer than the rest of the people in the thread, no? No. I didn't want to get too invloved in it as it is a subject I already worry about too much. I have a daughter and I look at her sometimes and wonder what we've done to this beautiful planet and if there will be anything left for future generations etc.... This post brought to you by Disney. lovely mental picture of Parky trying to fight off a T-Rex with platitudes about the beautiful planet I've got him against the backdrop of a ravaged planet belting out Michael Jackson's Earthsong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? You trying to get critical purchase Al?....Shame on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? You trying to get critical purchase Al?....Shame on you. You call that a straight answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14136 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? His summers spent helping out down the local day care centre for visually-impaired albinos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 18017 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Childish insults? Pointing out you were wrong on a VERY basic matter you mean? Basically, you have shown yourself to be completely ignorant on the subject of global warming. As such I don't think you have the ability to critically appraise that Horizon program or any other literature or media on the subject for that matter. Yet you still have the nerve to accuse "Greens" of not knowing what they are talking about. I'll know to avoid you in the future though, thanks for verifying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? You trying to get critical purchase Al?....Shame on you. You call that a straight answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 OK then, straight answer please, when you wrote: "It is a bit like talking to blind people in a dark room while you stand in a sunlit doorway." What were you alluding to? You trying to get critical purchase Al?....Shame on you. You call that a straight answer? Paxman style: What did you mean then? It's a simple enough question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invicta_Toon 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Childish insults? Pointing out you were wrong on a VERY basic matter you mean? Basically, you have shown yourself to be completely ignorant on the subject of global warming. As such I don't think you have the ability to critically appraise that Horizon program or any other literature or media on the subject for that matter. Yet you still have the nerve to accuse "Greens" of not knowing what they are talking about. I'll know to avoid you in the future though, thanks for verifying that. gee I might cry could you fucking backtrack any faster? just say what you don't agree with in the article, or I'll get the University to take back your doctorate in climate change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Its exactly 12° hotter today here, than it was 12 months ago. Now THATS science!!! NO people fuck off, this threads shit, pseudo intellectual bollocks blah blah blah. Rob W - Toontastic member # 46 Chez Given - Toontastic member # 559 New boy.................... Failure to recognise sarcasm = senile old twat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35373 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Childish insults? Pointing out you were wrong on a VERY basic matter you mean? Basically, you have shown yourself to be completely ignorant on the subject of global warming. As such I don't think you have the ability to critically appraise that Horizon program or any other literature or media on the subject for that matter. Yet you still have the nerve to accuse "Greens" of not knowing what they are talking about. I'll know to avoid you in the future though, thanks for verifying that. gee I might cry could you fucking backtrack any faster? just say what you don't agree with in the article, or I'll get the University to take back your doctorate in climate change I'm pretty sure Renton isn't backtracking. The story so far is that you fundamentally misunderstood the causes of global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invicta_Toon 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Childish insults? Pointing out you were wrong on a VERY basic matter you mean? Basically, you have shown yourself to be completely ignorant on the subject of global warming. As such I don't think you have the ability to critically appraise that Horizon program or any other literature or media on the subject for that matter. Yet you still have the nerve to accuse "Greens" of not knowing what they are talking about. I'll know to avoid you in the future though, thanks for verifying that. gee I might cry could you fucking backtrack any faster? just say what you don't agree with in the article, or I'll get the University to take back your doctorate in climate change I'm pretty sure Renton isn't backtracking. The story so far is that you fundamentally misunderstood the causes of global warming. no, I made a point which I mixed up with another point, because I don't carry this shit around in my head 24/7 (just not concerned in a Parky stylee tbh), but the main point I was making still stands unchallenged, and no amount of bullshit from Rentboy changes that fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 18017 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 found it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...g_summary.shtml it made sense when I saw it. Make of it what you will Nothing about the Ozone layer in that. Since the use of CFCs has been globally banned, the hole should recover, although it will take time. A classic example of how good science and political will power can prevent catastrophe. The hole in the ozone layer is presently only of concern to penguin dermatologists and their patients. go back to my original post, I wasn't talking about the ozone layer You said: Rob, did you ever see that Horizon where they had a scientist actually claiming we were in deeper shit than even the prevailiing CC scientists thought, whereby the heating of the planet should be much higher but is actually prevented by heavy pollutants suspended in cloud cover and contrail (suspended in water droplets) - he confirmed this in the days after 9/11 when contrails were removed from the equation. Anyway, the upshot of it was, if we remove the pollutants without repairing the ozone layer (which no-one has a clue how to do) we will actually heat up worse than if we stay as is You've repeated the connection several times since. And you have the hypocrisy to claim "greens" (whatever that umbrella term means) don't understand the science behind global warming, yet you somehow do, based on some very controversial viewpoints that were the subject of a Horizons program. I've never discussed anything with you but have you sussed I think. You're happy to pretend you're knowledgable in a subject, spout complete ungrounded nonsense, then just deny it when you are exposed for what you are. Hope HTT gets N-O up and running asap. all right I got the 2 things mixed up, but tbh I was going on a recolection of that program which was ages ago, and no I don't have a doctorate in global warming but unless you do, keep your childish insults to yourself My orignal point still stands that by decreasing pollution will actually make things worse. What is there in that article that you don't agree with? And don't give me any shit about the accepted opinion of science, a cursory knowledge knows it only takes 1 paper to change the entire body of scientific knowledge on a subject, often decades after the paper is published And also, on a minor point, as I also said, we have not repaired the layer (because it's impossible), it is repairing itself. As you rightly point out you have no knowledge of my background or experience, but if you want to get into a pissing contest I'll be happy to oblige Childish insults? Pointing out you were wrong on a VERY basic matter you mean? Basically, you have shown yourself to be completely ignorant on the subject of global warming. As such I don't think you have the ability to critically appraise that Horizon program or any other literature or media on the subject for that matter. Yet you still have the nerve to accuse "Greens" of not knowing what they are talking about. I'll know to avoid you in the future though, thanks for verifying that. gee I might cry could you fucking backtrack any faster? just say what you don't agree with in the article, or I'll get the University to take back your doctorate in climate change It's the opinion of a small group of scientists ffs, not being a climatologist (but knowing some basics) myself I don't really have much of an opinion on it, and neither should you really. I'm certainly not going to watch a program on the TV (Horizons ffs) and pretend I'm some world authority and that the mainstream climatologists are all wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Can't you answer Parky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14136 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 He's too busy doing the Parky strut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 18017 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 no, I made a point which I mixed up with another point, because I don't carry this shit around in my head 24/7 (just not concerned in a Parky stylee tbh), but the main point I was making still stands unchallenged, and no amount of bullshit from Rentboy changes that fact Ha ha. In the book trainspotting, only tossers called Renton "Rent boy". I have found the same thing to be true on message boards. Basically you don't have a clue what you are talking about, but unfortunately that doesn't stop you, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now