Check this out

[BlackSand]

Fuck you, douche.

The OP cannot state how the definition was changed without providing the original definition which, by his own admission, is something he can't do.

So why would we believe it? Because he said it?

That'd be fuckin' stupid...

.


Stop arguing with me about something that has nothing to do with me,
or the magnitude of examples I have already provided you with.
At least try to offer something worth discussing.

If you want to ignore everything ... You are just going to continue to fail ...

.​

 

[Canon Shooter]

.


Stop arguing with me about something that has nothing to do with me,
or the magnitude of examples I have already provided you with.
At least try to offer something worth discussing.

If you want to ignore everything ... You are just going to continue to fail ...

.​

Hey, you stupid dumbfuck, you addressed me first. I posed a question to the OP and you felt as though you had something important to say, so you started belching up tour never-ending litany of nonsense. If you don't like what I have to say to you perhaps you should just shut the fuck up the next time you fool yourself into believing that anyone would find your drivel even remotely interesting.

In the opening post, the poster claimed the definition of "climate change" has changed. I simply asked how it changed; what did it say then versus what it says now. Pretty simple stuff, really. It's funny that you're unable to wrap that pointed little head of yours around it. I took no issue with what it was allegedly changed to, or even that it's supposedly been changed at all.

I simply asked "What was the previous definition?"

That question, clearly, has proven far too vexxing for idiots like you...

 

[BlackSand]

Hey, you stupid dumbfuck, you addressed me first. I posed a question to the OP and you felt as though you had something important to say, so you started belching up tour never-ending litany of nonsense. If you don't like what I have to say to you perhaps you should just shut the fuck up the next time you fool yourself into believing that anyone would find your drivel even remotely interesting.

In the opening post, the poster claimed the definition of "climate change" has changed. I simply asked how it changed; what did it say then versus what it says now. Pretty simple stuff, really. It's funny that you're unable to wrap that pointed little head of yours around it. I took no issue with what it was allegedly changed to, or even that it's supposedly been changed at all.

I simply asked "What was the previous definition?"

That question, clearly, has proven far too vexxing for idiots like you...

.

And I gave you examples (multiple) ... To which you indicated you were not interested in seeing the error of you reasoning.
Say something worth discussing or continue to fail.

I don't give a damn if you what to ignore it ...

.​

 

[odanny]

.

You are just going to continue to fail ...

Altered
ADJECTIVE
changed in character or composition, typically in a comparatively small but significant way

.​

You can call it what you want, but what you are arguing is semantics. the definition did not change, no matter what you call it. It's unfortunate you cannot provide evidence otherwise.

 

[BlackSand]

You can call it what you want, but what you are arguing is semantics. the definition did not change, no matter what you call it.

.

Pretend that trying to argue with the definitions posted by saying nothing but ... "Call it what you want"
Is anything other than your attempt to call it whatever you want, with nothing to offer as a rebuttal ... And fail again.

You really don't need to keep showing up just to keep throwing yourself on your sword ...

.​

 

[Canon Shooter]

And I gave you examples (multiple) ... To which you indicated you were not interested in seeing the error of you reasoning.​

Thew OP, which is the person I posed my question to, has still failed to provide an answer.

This must be the narcissist in you. You can't the thought of people not knowing what you think (and I use that word loosely).

If I'd wanted to know what you thought, I'd have asked you. The fact that I didn't made you act like an insolent child..

Say something worth discussing or continue to fail.​

I was discussing the OP, dipshit...

I don't give a damn if you what to ignore it ...
.​

Really?

Because you sure as fuck got your diaper in a knot over it...

 

[Canon Shooter]

.

Pretend that trying to argue with the definitions posted by saying nothing but ... "Call it what you want"
Is anything other than your attempt to call it whatever you want, with nothing to offer as a rebuttal ... And fail again ...

.​

You are the very personification of the word "fail".

If failures had a country, you would be their king...

 

[BlackSand]

You are the very personification of the word "fail".

If failures had a country, you would be their king...

.

Well at least you have managed to reduce yourself to that kind of silly nonsense ...
It's weak ... But I'll give you a participation trophy.

.​

 

[BlackSand]

Really?

Because you sure as fuck got your diaper in a knot over it...

.

You have been arguing with me for hours and still haven't said a damn thing worth considering ...
And you want to say something about my panties being in a bind ...

Damn you are delusional.

.​

 

[Canon Shooter]

.

You have been arguing with me for hours and still haven't said a damn thing worth considering ...​

Because I don't wish to waste much time with mentally retarded douchebags like you...

And you want to say something about my panties being in a bind ...

Damn you are delusional..​

Says the guy who failed to comprehend the fact that I didn't say "panties".

You stupid fuck...

 

[TNHarley]

You haven't proven anything, and nothing has been "changed", the definition might now include a more specific time frame, as a point of reference, but nothing changed.

Yes, it did. They added AGW bullshit to it.
What kind of asswipe throws unproven theories into a term that is proven to be real?
A cultist. Thats who.
This is OBVIOUSLY politics. Not science. Not what terms actually mean.
Bedwetters like you rape the meaning of words all the time!

 

[odanny]

Yes, it did. They added AGW bullshit to it.
What kind of asswipe throws unproven theories into a term that is proven to be real?
A cultist. Thats who.
This is OBVIOUSLY politics. Not science. Not what terms actually mean.
Bedwetters like you rape the meaning of words all the time!

Your post demonstrates a hysterical reaction that is neither grounded in science or reality.

I suggest you take a least 5 deep breaths before posting on this thread.

 

[TNHarley]

Your post demonstrates a hysterical reaction that is neither grounded in science or reality.

I suggest you take a least 5 deep breaths before posting on this thread.

For ONCE, why dont you elaborate on your bullshit?
Just try it. It isnt so bad. Might even make you feel like a grown up.

 

[ReinyDays]

"Climate change" is New Speak for global warming ... because global warming doesn't sound scary, Hell's bells, the typical Indiana corn farmer will think "longer growing season" ... however if we say the climate is changing, this Indiana corn farmer will think "no rain in summer, I'm ruined" ...

The truth is no one's climate is changing ... average wind will be either from the west or from the east, depending of latitude ... unless you're STUPID enough to live in the desert, then your average wind is coming from above ... why the fuck move to Phoenix and then complain about water shortages, dumb ass ...