Absurd = Amount of failed climate predictions!!!

[jc456]

No, the OP is about the 124 years of failed climate predictions. YOU attacked the poster. Nice try dipshit. I see you were looking in the mirror when you called me the liar. Idiotic troll.

No, I was looking straight at you, liar. You pulled in here with your trailer of bullshit claiming, and I quote,

I hate to tell you Pogo, but that's not science. That's pure hysteria and that is religion baby. They are talking about morality. Science doesn't give a poo about morality. It cares about facts.

("that" in "that's not science" here refers to your own strawman in the previous paragraph, nothing I wrote, since I made no point on the topic, as you just yourself acknowledged above)

But here's the good part:

You beat on the religious nutters for ignoring science and embracing creationism but you follow the EXACT SAME PATH when it comes to global warming.

Wake the hell up!

Which I asked for any evidence for the existence of --- any evidence at all --- which you answered with:

We have addressed....and dismissed, with evidence, every assertion you guys have ever made. All you do is go "lalalalalalala" and pretend it didn't happen.
Congrats. You're a three year old.
Color me unsurprised...

-- which again referred to nothing, since I still made no "assertion"..

which you then followed with:

Oh please. Now you're just turning into a troll. You've been an ardent supporter of all things AGW since I joined this board.

-- which AGAIN I asked for any evidence for, anywhere.

And you completely utterly failed to find any. Like the sad little loser you are.

Not only that, you actually had the logical temerity to post, after reposting ALL my posts, which clearly showed NONE of the bullshit strawmen you set up:

Once again you attack the poster, and IGNORE THE ACTUAL CONTENT OF THE OP! Textbook warmist behavior.

Get that? See the words in big? You're trying to say the fact that I didn't address the topic, itself means I somehow addressed the topic.



How in the fuck does that work?

As I said, you're a sad little man and a lying hack. Be proud.

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined.

It means they're worried about it. When you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over whether climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

you should learn your opposition before you begin posting. Me thinks you have wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many screws in a jar somewhere.

 

[Pogo]

No, I was looking straight at you, liar. You pulled in here with your trailer of bullshit claiming, and I quote,

("that" in "that's not science" here refers to your own strawman in the previous paragraph, nothing I wrote, since I made no point on the topic, as you just yourself acknowledged above)

But here's the good part:
Which I asked for any evidence for the existence of --- any evidence at all --- which you answered with:
-- which again referred to nothing, since I still made no "assertion"..

which you then followed with:

-- which AGAIN I asked for any evidence for, anywhere.

And you completely utterly failed to find any. Like the sad little loser you are.

Not only that, you actually had the logical temerity to post, after reposting ALL my posts, which clearly showed NONE of the bullshit strawmen you set up:

Get that? See the words in big? You're trying to say the fact that I didn't address the topic, itself means I somehow addressed the topic.



How in the fuck does that work?

As I said, you're a sad little man and a lying hack. Be proud.

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined.

It means they're worried about it. When you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over whether climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

you should learn your opposition before you begin posting. Me thinks you have wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many screws in a jar somewhere.

Hey, you want an environment where only monologue is allowed, go move to Pyonyang. You're wasting your time here; this is a discussion board. And some of us are willing to work to see that it stays that way.

Now then ----
What have you posted here on the topic? Perhaps I missed it.

 

[jc456]

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined.

It means they're worried about it. When you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over whether climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

you should learn your opposition before you begin posting. Me thinks you have wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many screws in a jar somewhere.

Hey, you want an environment where only monologue is allowed, go move to Pyonyang. You're wasting your time here; this is a discussion board. And some of us are willing to work to see that it stays that way.

Now then ----
What have you posted here on the topic? Perhaps I missed it.

I am waiting for yours so that there can actually be an exchange of ideas. you only going after a poster as you did here to the OP demonstrates to me, you have nothing of value to add to a thread. As such, I call you out on it. Now you're trying to back track and act like you have some macho thing going on, but you're just a leftist loser that F A I L E D!!!!!!!

 

[Pogo]

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined.

It means they're worried about it. When you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over whether climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

you should learn your opposition before you begin posting. Me thinks you have wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many screws in a jar somewhere.

Hey, you want an environment where only monologue is allowed, go move to Pyonyang. You're wasting your time here; this is a discussion board. And some of us are willing to work to see that it stays that way.

Now then ----
What have you posted here on the topic? Perhaps I missed it.

I am waiting for yours so that there can actually be an exchange of ideas. you only going after a poster as you did here to the OP demonstrates to me, you have nothing of value to add to a thread. As such, I call you out on it. Now you're trying to back track and act like you have some macho thing going on, but you're just a leftist loser that F A I L E D!!!!!!!

Yuh huh.

And what do you find "leftist" about taking no position then?

The question remains unmolested: what have you posted here aside from trolling me?

 

[jc456]

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined.

It means they're worried about it. When you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over whether climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

you should learn your opposition before you begin posting. Me thinks you have wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many screws in a jar somewhere.

Hey, you want an environment where only monologue is allowed, go move to Pyonyang. You're wasting your time here; this is a discussion board. And some of us are willing to work to see that it stays that way.

Now then ----
What have you posted here on the topic? Perhaps I missed it.

I am waiting for yours so that there can actually be an exchange of ideas. you only going after a poster as you did here to the OP demonstrates to me, you have nothing of value to add to a thread. As such, I call you out on it. Now you're trying to back track and act like you have some macho thing going on, but you're just a leftist loser that F A I L E D!!!!!!!

Yuh huh.

And what do you find "leftist" about taking no position then?

The question remains unmolested: what have you posted here aside from trolling me?

I already asked you that about the OP. What is it that you posted that requires anything but what you got? Name one thing that was posted against the material and not the poster of the OP.

i.e., your original post to this thread:

"If whatever you're continually babbling about is "failed" ---- how come you feel the need to put up five new threads about it every week?"

 

[Pogo]

Nothing then?

 

[jc456]

Nothing then?

I know you have nothing, you've proved that here. I agree with the OP, what is it I need to provide? I responded to your first post and you have acted like a little baby every post since. Nice try, but you F A I L E D, AGAIN..........................

 

[skookerasbil]

No, the OP is about the 124 years of failed climate predictions. YOU attacked the poster. Nice try dipshit. I see you were looking in the mirror when you called me the liar. Idiotic troll.

No, I was looking straight at you, liar. You pulled in here with your trailer of bullshit claiming, and I quote,

I hate to tell you Pogo, but that's not science. That's pure hysteria and that is religion baby. They are talking about morality. Science doesn't give a poo about morality. It cares about facts.

("that" in "that's not science" here refers to your own strawman in the previous paragraph, nothing I wrote, since I made no point on the topic, as you just yourself acknowledged above)

But here's the good part:

You beat on the religious nutters for ignoring science and embracing creationism but you follow the EXACT SAME PATH when it comes to global warming.

Wake the hell up!

Which I asked for any evidence for the existence of --- any evidence at all --- which you answered with:

We have addressed....and dismissed, with evidence, every assertion you guys have ever made. All you do is go "lalalalalalala" and pretend it didn't happen.
Congrats. You're a three year old.
Color me unsurprised...

-- which again referred to nothing, since I still made no "assertion"..

which you then followed with:

Oh please. Now you're just turning into a troll. You've been an ardent supporter of all things AGW since I joined this board.

-- which AGAIN I asked for any evidence for, anywhere.

And you completely utterly failed to find any. Like the sad little loser you are.

Not only that, you actually had the logical temerity to post, after reposting ALL my posts, which clearly showed NONE of the bullshit strawmen you set up:

Once again you attack the poster, and IGNORE THE ACTUAL CONTENT OF THE OP! Textbook warmist behavior.

Get that? See the words in big? You're trying to say the fact that I didn't address the topic, itself means I somehow addressed the topic.



How in the fuck does that work?

As I said, you're a sad little man and a lying hack. Be proud.

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you? Are you as dense as pea soup fog?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

This isn't about climate change. Never was.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined. It means they're worried about it. If you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove. And I called him out on that too.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse. It's not a question of polluting the literal air but polluting the rhetorical air.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

But the naked denialism is WiNniNg!!!! The boobies are obviously a red flag for not lOsInG!! Any time you see the boobies......some poor AGW mofu is taking it on the chin again!!

Heres the real pollution that the AGW climate crusaders have to deal with.............


After 25 years of bomb throwing, nobody cares about the science.........its just not mattering!! Check any poll from Pew, Gallup or Rasmussen!!! For all the 97%'s.....all the glacier bs......all the apocalypse crap that never came true........all the phoney data..........all the promises of the bliss of green energy, we end up with THIS >>>>


More Proof the skeptics are WINNING US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

347 pages ....3,500 posts ....almost 115,00 "views"


Because lots of people have wanted to check out the reality of the utter disasterous Jonestown landscape that is AGW in 2014!!! Scores of links ( something the AGW k00ks rarely provide )....lots and lots of laughs!!!


And oh.....not a single non-denier can provide one single link displaying that the science is mattering in the real world!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

No, I was looking straight at you, liar. You pulled in here with your trailer of bullshit claiming, and I quote,

("that" in "that's not science" here refers to your own strawman in the previous paragraph, nothing I wrote, since I made no point on the topic, as you just yourself acknowledged above)

But here's the good part:
Which I asked for any evidence for the existence of --- any evidence at all --- which you answered with:
-- which again referred to nothing, since I still made no "assertion"..

which you then followed with:

-- which AGAIN I asked for any evidence for, anywhere.

And you completely utterly failed to find any. Like the sad little loser you are.

Not only that, you actually had the logical temerity to post, after reposting ALL my posts, which clearly showed NONE of the bullshit strawmen you set up:

Get that? See the words in big? You're trying to say the fact that I didn't address the topic, itself means I somehow addressed the topic.



How in the fuck does that work?

As I said, you're a sad little man and a lying hack. Be proud.

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you? Are you as dense as pea soup fog?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

This isn't about climate change. Never was.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined. It means they're worried about it. If you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove. And I called him out on that too.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse. It's not a question of polluting the literal air but polluting the rhetorical air.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

But the naked denialism is WiNniNg!!!! The boobies are obviously a red flag for not lOsInG!! Any time you see the boobies......some poor AGW mofu is taking it on the chin again!!

Heres the real pollution that the AGW climate crusaders have to deal with.............


After 25 years of bomb throwing, nobody cares about the science.........its just not mattering!! Check any poll from Pew, Gallup or Rasmussen!!! For all the 97%'s.....all the glacier bs......all the apocalypse crap that never came true........all the phoney data..........all the promises of the bliss of green energy, we end up with THIS >>>>


More Proof the skeptics are WINNING US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

347 pages ....3,500 posts ....almost 115,00 "views"


Because lots of people have wanted to check out the reality of the utter disasterous Jonestown landscape that is AGW in 2014!!! Scores of links ( something the AGW k00ks rarely provide )....lots and lots of laughs!!!


And oh.....not a single non-denier can provide one single link displaying that the science is mattering in the real world!!!

Sweetie.....I just have to show up in here each day and I win.......its a hoot!!

 

[skookerasbil]

[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/3394114_2-10.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[80zephyr]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

 

[westwall]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

 

[80zephyr]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

 

[westwall]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

Ummmm, the math I come with is .000788 square feet per person. You've only got 5,517,600 sq ft to parcel out. Placing a human at 4 square feet (i.e. 2 feet per side) and you need 28,000,000,000 square feet to put them all in.

 

[bripat9643]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

Ummmm, the math I come with is .000788 square feet per person. You've only got 5,517,600 sq ft to parcel out. Placing a human at 4 square feet (i.e. 2 feet per side) and you need 28,000,000,000 square feet to put them all in.

There are single buildings bigger than 5 million sq feet, so your math is obviously wrong. According to Wiki, RI is 1214 square miles in area. 1 sq mile = 5280 X 5280 Sq Ft. That equals 27,878,400 sq ft. Multiply by 1214 and you get 33 billion sq ft - more than enough for the entire population of the world, even if you give each person 4 sq ft of space.

 

[initforme]

While I have my doubts on global warming, I am thankful every day for the clean water and clean air acts which prevent corporations from willfully and wantingly and purposely polluting our air and water. If there were less regulations our corporations would want to pollute peoples water and get away with it. Or our air would resemble that of what is happening in China which is basically anti human. Having to wear a mask to breathe the air should result in the persecution of the companies doing the damage.

 

[80zephyr]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

Ummmm, the math I come with is .000788 square feet per person. You've only got 5,517,600 sq ft to parcel out. Placing a human at 4 square feet (i.e. 2 feet per side) and you need 28,000,000,000 square feet to put them all in.

Umm, nope. You have 33788620800 square feet to parcel out .That comes to 4.82 square feet per person if you figure 7 billion people.

Mark

 

[Pogo]

The fact remains you ignored the OP and attacked the POSTER. A standard MO of all progressive retards who can't think for themselves and come up with an argument of their own. Your flailing attempt to divert attention away from your colossal fail are duly noted little troll.

-- which is exactly what I said I'd been doing and not the bullshit you've been claiming about this "AGW" crap. So here you are admitting you've been lying about that the entire time.

Which is what I've been saying the entire time.

Dumbass.

so attacking the poster does what for the forum? Oh, shows you as a tool, troll someone who knows nothing about what the topic of a thread is about.

You F A I L toolboy!!!!!

And anything in the OP is most probably the truth since the warmers on here have never been able to produce an experiment that proves the position they believe in. If you sir are part of that side, then you not only F A I L, you are also a L O S E R!!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!!

Cheeses Christ on a Cracker, you need me to essplain this to you? Are you as dense as pea soup fog?

Here's the point of my observations here -- from the beginning.

This isn't about climate change. Never was.

There is this faction, represented by Kook-boy and Bustball (and others elsewhere) comprised of sophistic denialists whose self-proclaimed role is to put down, at all costs, any theory, idea or person that might in some way suggest any possibility of human responsibility for the environment. To this end of eliminating any hint of suggestion of a chance of a possibility of an idea in that direction, they take this pro-active approach, where Kooks posts a new no-no thread every few daze, replete with shaking tits and little faces rolling around, not in any kind of response but in initiative. That is, attempting to put down arguments nobody made, pre-emptively.

Now when somebody goes out of their way to declare a negative ("but it's just a FACT that Hitler was left wing"), it's a dead giveaway that there's a positive they're trying to squelch, whether that positive is real or imagined. It means they're worried about it. If you're not worried about something, you don't have a need to post a thread denying it every other day.

THAT is what I called Kooks out for doing here in his endless denialism. It's nakedly transparent that he's worried that this idea will grow legs, so he's shooting at every spot where any legs might grow (very effectively too-- shaky tits are just poisonous to legs-- /sarc).

Bustball, doing his part in this sophistry army, comes charging in attacking me for exposing that tactic, declaring I've been on this "AGW" side since he came to this site (two years before I even joined), which goes to demonstrate the depth of his own dishonesty. So I challenged him to prove that and he melted down into a spinning top of flailing accusations he still can't prove. And I called him out on that too.

The reality is I take an open position; I don't know if we influence climate or not, which is what I've always said here, which is why Bustball can't come up with anything -- there's nothing to come up with, because he made it up in the quest to Eliminate any opposition -- again pre-emptively (that means "before it starts"). That's my position -- that I don't presume to know or have the temporal perspective to know.

Those who take the position of the Kooks and Bustballs are declaring they already DO know, which I find supremely arrogant, and set out to eliminate any ghost of a chance that anyone anywhere will challenge that arrogance, even if it means blatantly making shit up. Like Bustball did.

And I called him on it, and the next time somebody does that I'll fucking call it out again.

See if you can waddle through that and figure out what the fuck's going on here. This is not a struggle over climate change -- this is a struggle over shutting people up and closing down discourse. It's not a question of polluting the literal air but polluting the rhetorical air.

And I don't play that. Like it or lump it.

But the naked denialism is WiNniNg!!!! The boobies are obviously a red flag for not lOsInG!! Any time you see the boobies......some poor AGW mofu is taking it on the chin again!!

Heres the real pollution that the AGW climate crusaders have to deal with.............


After 25 years of bomb throwing, nobody cares about the science.........its just not mattering!! Check any poll from Pew, Gallup or Rasmussen!!! For all the 97%'s.....all the glacier bs......all the apocalypse crap that never came true........all the phoney data..........all the promises of the bliss of green energy, we end up with THIS >>>>


More Proof the skeptics are WINNING US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

347 pages ....3,500 posts ....almost 115,00 "views"


Because lots of people have wanted to check out the reality of the utter disasterous Jonestown landscape that is AGW in 2014!!! Scores of links ( something the AGW k00ks rarely provide )....lots and lots of laughs!!!


And oh.....not a single non-denier can provide one single link displaying that the science is mattering in the real world!!!

Sweetie.....I just have to show up in here each day and I win.......its a hoot!!

You call yourself "Sweetie"?

Sorry dood ...... that's weird.

 

[westwall]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

Ummmm, the math I come with is .000788 square feet per person. You've only got 5,517,600 sq ft to parcel out. Placing a human at 4 square feet (i.e. 2 feet per side) and you need 28,000,000,000 square feet to put them all in.

There are single buildings bigger than 5 million sq feet, so your math is obviously wrong. According to Wiki, RI is 1214 square miles in area. 1 sq mile = 5280 X 5280 Sq Ft. That equals 27,878,400 sq ft. Multiply by 1214 and you get 33 billion sq ft - more than enough for the entire population of the world, even if you give each person 4 sq ft of space.

Yup, you're correct, I missed the decimal point and screwed up the calcs. I hate not being able to see!

 

[westwall]

I currently look at the climate/environment this way:
1. Our planet's glaciers are indeed diminishing significantly.
2. The ice melt-off is causing a gradual rise of the oceans.
3. We continue de-forestation, here and abroad.
4. We continue dumping crap into the atmosphere and oceans.
5. We are currently responsible for the extinction and near extinction of various species.
6. Overall, we as a species are more concerned for our day to day issues than anything outside that.
I used to grumble about the state of our environment, however, I have ceased complaining and have taken a more optomistic approach for the following reasons:
1. The planet has a finite size and thus has a finite amount of fertile land.
2. The human population growth is putting pressure on that.
3. Once we have significantly surpassed the planet's capability of feeding the population, there will be a massive die-off via starvation and food wars, causing a further significant decline in the human population, most likely putting us back into the stone age and solving the overall problem.
I am obviously just guessing, but I figure that the significant food shortages will begin manifesting itself with our great-great grandchildren, who will starve to death. Those that don't starve will be embroiled in wars for food resources.
Personally, I'm rooting for the total annihilation of mankind and hoping that some better species will develop.

Lol. Want a couple more facts to ponder?

Our environment is MUCH BETTER than it was in the 1950's. When I was a kid, our rivers were polluted as was our air. Today, we have deer, turkeys, ducks, etc. where yesterday there were none.

Also, as to your overpopulation projection. I need you to find a globe of the Earth, then find Rhode Island on that globe. Now, while looking at Rhode Island, understand that EVERY PERSON ON EARTH could fit in Rhode Island. I figure we have plenty of room left.

Mark

That's not true. However you can fit every living person into the State of Texas. That is a fact.

Wrong. Its true. If you don't believe me, do the math. It comes out to about 6 square feet per person.

Mark

Ummmm, the math I come with is .000788 square feet per person. You've only got 5,517,600 sq ft to parcel out. Placing a human at 4 square feet (i.e. 2 feet per side) and you need 28,000,000,000 square feet to put them all in.

Umm, nope. You have 33788620800 square feet to parcel out .That comes to 4.82 square feet per person if you figure 7 billion people.

Mark

Yup, you're correct. I missed a decimal point and didn't catch it.