If NASA scientists are right, the Thames will be freezing over again.

The comment about your newsreader is apt, though. Nobody has any idea whom you're replying to. The above is a quotation of your entire post as it appears in a real newsreader.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

=A0Trying to put everybody straight. =A0That time it really was accidental= ,

This time it's accidental, but every other time it's been intentional? We are supposed to imagine that you stopped being a nitwit when enough people had pointed out that you were acting like a twit?

You've been leaping right in at regular intervals over the past few days - I'm just following your example, so you aren't really in any position to complain

evious post to which you were replying, and

"Learn how to get ..." isn't exactly treating you with a lot of respect.

ionary, Bill. =A0But you did not really expect me to follow your directives= , did you?

No. You do come over as dim-witted twit, of the kind that takes a while to wake up to the social norms when he invades a new environment. I'm glad to see that the penny has finally dropped, but it did take a while.

you are.

What makes you think that?

I'm bored and can't get excited about doing the stuff that I ought to be doing. It's more of an explanation than an excuse, but you'll just have to live with that.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

offering

This is an electronics discussion group, you twit. Stop acting like the village gossip and discuss some electronics. Get off your lazy ass and *do* some electronics.

What a bunch of old hens peck and squawk here.

Well, quit droning and dreaming and get going on it.

Cheap shot with the snippage John.

makes

...

Well, that's pretty watered down. Here is some genuine conspiracy mixed in with dishonesty and questionable ethics.

This is a nice piece: "Effort will focus on providing curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain?two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science."

Sloman has all day to post hundreds of lines of droning insults and off-topic blather. I have a day job. There's no way I'm going to read all of his trash, much less respond to all of it.

Actually, I respond to off-topic blather, a lot of which comes from John Larkin. He regards any correction of his misconceptions as a personal insult, and hates reading through the detail that reveals where he screwed up.

Mainly because I'm mostly right and he's mostly wrong. It's hard to produce a snappy response to some tedious argument that shows that you didn't know what you were talking about, so his reactions tend to emphasise that I'm not designing much electronics at the moment, while he is. It never has much to do with the reliability of the information that he espoused, but does seem to sooth his easily injured vanity.

For someone with a day job, he does post a lot here. He's the all-time leading poster with 28271 posts to his credit. I'm fifth, with 16448. I am leading this month, with 139 posts, but John isn't far behind with 127, closely followed by Phil Hobbs with 126.

My feeling is that both of them are active here at least in part as a way of generating interest in their businesses - which case the day job would include posting here.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

This is an electronics design group, you idiot.

Since you are exactly the kind of idiot who regularly posts off-topic nonsense here, you've got no business telling me that this is an electronics design group, and it's amazingly stupid of you to react to my posting corrections to your off-topic nonsense by drawing attention to the fact that nothing I've designed recently has yet been turned into hardware.

If someone would buy up some of my excessive free time and occupy it with the process of turning inspiration into loaded printed circuit board, I'd have less time to devote to being aware of the great issues of the day, and the pathetic inadequacies of your opinions on these subjects.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Unlikely.

in

Seems a pittance compared to what the panic-people are getting though, doesn't it? Why, Al Gore alone's raked in $100e6.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

d in

Sure, but he's doing something socially useful, and the denialists are simply lying to the public. Admittedly, some of the lies they tell match some of your misconceptions, so you won't appreciate this, but back in the real world this is what's actually going on.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Since I've been trying to sell my free time since June 2003, and never got any further than a couple of job interviews, "unlikely" does seem to be the right word. I can hope that I can do better in Sydney when we move (in October) but I'm not wildly optimistic,

In the meantime you are going to have to put up with informed criticism. You might acquire enough sense to begin learn from it, rather than persistently trotting out the same rubbish that reliably seduces you, time and time again, but - again - I'm not optimistic.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Sloman? Optimistic?

Sloman? Informed?

But not *wildly* optimistic ...

Better informed than you are when it comes to subjects outside of electronics - if you were just a little bit less ignorant and over- confident, you might have noticed.

Try to get it into your head that I don't tell that you are wrong from some deep-rooted need to insult your intelligence (actually it's you knowledge that is at fault, but espousing silly mistakes does make you look stupid), but rather because you have posted ill-informed nonsense which cries out for correction.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Sloman? Role model?

So you say, but very contrary to your track record. You respond to BS more than anyone else.

I post more about electronics than anyone else here. You post almost nothing on topic.