Offthemat Posted March 1 Posted March 1 4 minutes ago, mspart said: Sounds like it was more of a comment on him then eh? mspart Not unusual.
jross Posted March 1 Posted March 1 17 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: Oh - Geez. WTF was that... waaaaaay too long. Just a hint, nobody read it all. Nobody. Have you lost your damn mind? I did. His words are clear. Many people like well written longform. https://longreads.com/2023/12/21/best-of-2023-the-audience-awards/ https://medium.com/@deerwood/get-ready-to-settle-in-why-longreads-are-taking-over-the-internet-2b6fe5241e52 He probably doesn't have the time to write fewer words.
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 23 hours ago, Husker_Du said: is it possible for you to respond with something of substance? Oh sure. I see substance so little here lately that I felt like it had gone out of style. (For you, neither) Ahem... Mspart's post was simply too long for most forum members to take the time to read. Although he may have spent some time authoring the post, it resulted in a very long and very rambling pile of words that amounted to very little message. I did read the entire thing and "critically disjointed" is the best way I can describe it. The ultimate stupidity in mspart's post was one specific comment: Quote This statement does not give me confidence in your position. You don't even know when it is happening, last few centuries or last few decades. Nail it down man. Mspart - that was a dog dumb stupid post. If you don't understand what we're talking about - think of it this way. We still can't predict the weather. We know a lot; we have supercomputers churning through weather models 24/7 all year long. And yet we still can't predict it all that well. Better than ever before, but not anywhere near 100%. If understanding things requires 100% certainty for you, then you'll need to find a different topic. This one isn't for you.
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 9 hours ago, mspart said: Is that more of a comment on me or you? mspart You. Definitely you. All you. Your post was a giant pile of word salad garbage. So... yes, you.
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 8 hours ago, Offthemat said: I had no difficulty reading it. Ummm... OK. It is in english, and if you can read english you should be able to read it without difficulty. So - umm... good job their, sport! Good job reading english.
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 6 hours ago, jross said: I did. His words are clear. Many people like well written longform. https://longreads.com/2023/12/21/best-of-2023-the-audience-awards/ https://medium.com/@deerwood/get-ready-to-settle-in-why-longreads-are-taking-over-the-internet-2b6fe5241e52 He probably doesn't have the time to write fewer words. You're completely mistaken. Yes, his words were clear. Each and every one. It's the putting together of the individual clear words into clear sentences and clear paragraphs that is the challenge. And in this last case, a failed one. You seem to lack a basic understanding of English here. It's not like Chinese. In English, long or short doesn't matter in the least. It's clarity that matters.
Husker_Du Posted March 2 Author Posted March 2 you're still not posting anything of substance. either make a point, provide context, or add data/link/evidence. consider yourself warned. you add nothing. 1 TBD
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 31 minutes ago, Husker_Du said: you're still not posting anything of substance. either make a point, provide context, or add data/link/evidence. consider yourself warned. you add nothing. I beg to differ. The part about putting clear words into clear sentences and paragraphs was pure gold. Really good stuff, compared to the drivel you post. I'm in total agreement with RedViking: Quote All indications are that we are 100% responsible, or very close. the best source of info is the climatologists at NOAA or others that are reputable/published at universities. Yes, there are other non-anthropogenic factors that influence temps, but those are taken into account in climate models and we have a very solid understanding of what those are and where we are in the respective cycles. The right-wing whack jobs conveniently ignore them because their analyses don't fit with their agenda. So much science in the climate models that we do have a decent understanding (yet not near 100%.) Yet whack jobs can't add anything - just warnings and stupidity. I guess everybody has a station in life.
Husker_Du Posted March 2 Author Posted March 2 you'll be banned tomorrow. thanks for playing. 3 1 TBD
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, Husker_Du said: you're still not posting anything of substance. either make a point, provide context, or add data/link/evidence. consider yourself warned. you add nothing. I made more than one point, provided context and added relevant evidence. How much more discussion gymnastics do you suggest I perform? Edited March 2 by GreatWhiteNorth 1
JimmyBT Posted March 2 Posted March 2 7 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: I beg to differ. The part about putting clear words into clear sentences and paragraphs was pure gold. Really good stuff, compared to the drivel you post. I'm in total agreement with RedViking: So much science in the climate models that we do have a decent understanding (yet not near 100%.) Yet whack jobs can't add anything - just warnings and stupidity. I guess everybody has a station in life. You are the wOkest MFer on here. By far. Keep telling yourself (and the rest of us) you’re not. 1
Paul158 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 4 hours ago, Ohio Elite said: Great cartoon and truthful on top of that. 1
Paul158 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 4 hours ago, Ohio Elite said: Only thing they forgot was the proper pronoun to be called. 1
ionel Posted March 2 Posted March 2 1 hour ago, Paul158 said: Only thing they forgot was the proper pronoun to be called. "Them's hired!" 1 .
Lipdrag Posted March 3 Posted March 3 7 hours ago, ionel said: "Them's hired!" Dem be hired! Be DEI and pronoun diverse. 1
ionel Posted March 4 Posted March 4 31 minutes ago, Husker_Du said: bye, bye, New Yorkers. you got less then a decade I've got a new startup focusing on developing a new line of 14" rubber boots targeting the east coast market. Sure they look a lot like the boots I wore as a kid in the family cattle feedlot, but I digress. Looking for venture capital, who wants in? .
headshuck Posted March 4 Posted March 4 I’m in and would like to work in R&D on the future product lineup.
ionel Posted March 4 Posted March 4 1 hour ago, headshuck said: I’m in and would like to work in R&D on the future product lineup. Good to have you on board with your ^^^ idea I'm willing to give you 49% stake in the startup. .
GreatWhiteNorth Posted March 4 Posted March 4 On 3/2/2024 at 9:00 AM, JimmyBT said: You are the wOkest MFer on here. By far. Keep telling yourself (and the rest of us) you’re not. It'll be OK... you'll be fine. You little woke'sters just get a little overexcited sometimes.
ionel Posted March 4 Posted March 4 8 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: It'll be OK... you'll be fine. You little woke'sters just get a little overexcited sometimes. wanna buy some boots? .
JimmyBT Posted March 4 Posted March 4 15 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said: It'll be OK... you'll be fine. You little woke'sters just get a little overexcited sometimes. Don’t worry Donald loves you
JimmyBT Posted March 4 Posted March 4 7 minutes ago, ionel said: wanna buy some boots? He loves his governor and the high taxes so he can’t afford boots
Sophie Sharp Ocean Township, New Jersey Class of 2025 Committed to Alvernia (Women) Projected Weight: 124, 131
Olivia Davis Monte Vista, California Class of 2025 Committed to William Jewell (Women) Projected Weight: 145
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