OT: An Appeal by everyone's favourite eco-loon, Greta Thunberg

ike

Cursitor Doom does have these bizarre delusions.

I asked him to identify the recent thread where I'd posted a link to my web site.

and suggested that he might explain why I might have done that.

His mind seems to be a bit too idle to have been able to cope with the chal lenge.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

ile

Snipping Cursitor Doom isn't cheating, and certainly wasn't in this case.

eat your bum would look like the black hole of Calcutta.

I recently caught you cheating in exactly this way - you hadn't even marked your snip. You certainly deserved a kick up the backside then, but since y ou don't seem to have realised that you were cheating, a spot of education might be a more appropriate response.

Phil is lot more like an maniac that whit3rd, but probably isn't aware of t his.

Not an accurate diagnosis. Whit3rd did actually have a rational point to ma ke, even if Phil couldn't understand it. Since Cursitor Doom doesn't unders tand the difference between opinion and evidence, whit3rd was wasting his t ime, but we all do quite a bit of that when coping with the demented fracti on of the people who post here.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

------------------------------

** FFS yet again, misrepresenting an opponent's points is really desperate stuff. ** Yawnnnn ....

All complaints MUST be UNDER the words involved.

Otherwise it's simply abuse. Another debating cheat.

Sloman is a totally workless arguer and fallacious reasoner.

---------------------------------------------------------

** To answer Bill's ACTUAL request WOULD of course require producing evidence.

The Witless one's post relied on over-snipping to make an irrelevant point.

Another example of misrepresenting another's case.

IOW a blatant, desperate lie.

FFS The Witless troll is a congenital idiot, proved that here countless times over more than a decade.

...... Phil

Well, by your own stated criteria, because there's no wording of 'an irrelevant point' offered, you have just posted simple abuse.

Your case against 'simple abuse' of this sort is clearly insincere. Naughty, naughty!

a futile attempt to spoon-feed you evidence you would only refute without . ..

e.

!!

e stuff.

But you do it all the time.

y cheat your bum would look like the black hole of Calcutta.

Phil invents his own rules.

Entirely justified abuse in this case.

But we aren't debating. Debates have rules about taking the opponents asser tions at face value, which wouldn't work here, since the opponents often ha ve a very poor grasp of reality, coupled with inflated idea of their own co mpetence.

Or so Phil likes to think.

ence.

Not necessarily. Recognising that Greta Thurnberg was merely reiterating po ints made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wouldn't need an ything more than a link to the IPCC web-site, which is merely pointing to e vidence, rather than producing it.

t.

The fact that Cursitor Doom was being evasive does strike me as relevant, a nd whit3rd had posted enough to make that obvious - it may not have been ob vious to Phil whose preconceptions do tend to blind him to the obvious.

Phil does like to make that kind of claim. It's lot easier than posting eno ugh detailed argument to validate it, even when it is possible.

times over more than a decade.

"Congenital" explicitly claims that he born an idiot. Phil would like it to be true that whit3rd is an idiot now, but if wishes were horses beggars wo uld ride.

Making claims about his mental capacity at birth is even sillier.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

1 Timothy 6:10 KJV - For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with.

------------------

** Debating cheat, abuse posing as a point.

** Same debating cheat as above

** Same again.

** Correct, Slomanm stopped many days ago.

It's all cheating from him now.

** Same cheat - abuse posing as a response.

** Yes, necessarily. ** Same again - that is a non fact.

** I hate making it, I wish it were not the case. . ** No-one can achieve such wide ranging, pure idiocy by dint of effort alone. *Born in talent* has got to be involved.

** So folk do NOT have inherited talents ?

Get a big fight from geneticists on that one, Bill.

Assholes are party born and the rest is the result of sheer practice.

You know the old saying ...

BTW: Not than I am suggesting you are perfect in any way.

..... Phil

ITYM "The devil makes work for idle hands"?

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Nope! It's a giant *con-trick* and YOU have clearly fallen for it.

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

1) Whatever he asked for, he won't get it from me as I have better things to do than give him the pointless arguments he craves. 2) Whether it's analysis or evidence is immaterial as he will reject either out of hand if it contradicts his own, ignorance-based, immutable viewpoint. 3) You and Sloman are two of the biggest time-wasting trolls on this newsgroup and both of you put together aren't worth 2 minutes of my time.

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of  
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet  
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

ess times over more than a decade.

one.

Phil can perceive idiocy in perfectly reasonable posts.

He's got very creative powers of observation. What he's observing doesn't s eem to inhibit those powers at all.

If you say so.

But you have to be able to separate nature and nuture to work out whether a talent is learned or inherited.

Since you haven't got any information about how whit3rd performed before he learned to type, your assertions are pure speculation.

Probably not. What seems to get inherited are tiny chunks of contributions to talent, none of which have - on their own - much effect. How they work, and when their effects become visible isn't yet clear, and it's going to ta ke a lot more data (and a great many more genomes) before they'd have anyth ing to fight about.

Congratulations. You've clearly put in a lot of work.

I know a lot of old sayings. None springs to mind.

That would be an irrational assertion (not that that would discourage you).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

That's the response I was expecting.

Cursitor Doom is happy to make assertions. Following them up is more demanding.

Cursitor Doom has absolute faith in the twaddle his ignorance purveyors serve up to him. He resents the suggestion that he is being conned. Gullible twits are like that.

Cursitor Doom wants to concentrate on lapping up the kind of nonsense that makes him feel good. He's a happy gullible twit.

Finding out that he looks like a gullible twit wouldn't make him any happier, despite all the effort he puts into looking like the most gullible twit around.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Cursitor Doom is this group's gullible twit (though John Larkin and NT are in the same league).

The proposition that the Paris Accord was some kind of confidence trick is the sort of bizarre conspiracy theory that only the most gullible of twits could fall for. It's no surprise that Cursitor Doom has endorsed it - he ha s to be seen to be an utterly gullible twit on every possible occasion to p reserve his status as the most gullible twit posting here.

It's not the sort of status that anybody would normally want, but Cursitor Doom is a singularly undistinguished half-wit and can only stand out by bei ng exceptionally half-witted. He's got a depressing amount of competition h ere, but so far seems to be ahead in the race to bottom.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

funny isn't it

you're actually disputing what I said there? Lol

I would have thought that too obvious to need a mention.

Just more BSSBS

Why would you think that? You are no kind of expert in anything.

You do perform the pretentious clown role to perfection, but that doesn't demand any kind of expertise.

Evidently. You couldn't be closer to a perfect example - you do share the same skin, after all.

NT does have his private language.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

as Cursitor Doom are coming from. I know exactly what he's thinking - or r ather feeling, since organised thought seems to be quite beyond him.

t he wants to present, and that's easy to decode.

n.

reading to do the prediction.

e gets heckled about it, he doesn't seem to understand the content of the c riticism, and writes it off as nonsense (which is to say he can't make sens e of what is being said, apart form the fact that it's hostile). It's fairl y transparent attitude, and you don't need mind-reading skills to decode it .

explanation is that there isn't any content there to be supplied.

nking. No wonder you like it. But the bigger reason is you don't like peopl e pointing out when your ideas are crassly stupid.

do seem to think that they can make that claim, and that doesn't worry me at all.

've been grateful for the correction - search on posts by me containing the word "oops".

your 'analyses,' for want of a better word, both of me, CD and yourself are the product of your deluded imagination & mental issues.

He can have what he persistently asks for. Until I get bored.

If he hasn't seen any problem yet with her position it's not worth discussing.