Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #680176 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-04-07 10:33 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-04-11 10:46 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 191 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-07 10:33 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-07 09:48 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-07 11:23 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-07 10:33 -0500
" Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-07 12:05 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-07 17:51 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-07 18:26 -0700
" Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-07 20:40 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-07 20:52 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-07 21:00 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-08 04:05 +0000
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-07 21:07 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-07 21:06 -0700
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-08 07:24 +0200
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-08 11:54 -0400
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-08 12:29 -0400
Re: " Repent, The End is Near, I personally guarantee it ! " -- K. Kensington. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-08 19:33 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-04-09 21:06 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-10 08:32 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-07 11:43 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-07 12:34 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-07 12:52 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Just Wondering <JustWondering@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-07 11:58 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-08 16:55 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-04-09 21:10 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-12 06:40 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-11 19:24 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-04-12 19:59 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-15 08:13 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-15 08:48 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-18 11:19 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-08 16:54 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-08 09:04 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-08 11:29 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-08 12:22 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-08 11:22 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-08 12:17 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-08 12:29 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-08 23:46 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 14:10 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 11:28 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 11:32 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 11:05 -0500
Air causes cancer. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-09 10:54 -0700
Re: Air causes cancer. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 17:29 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-09 13:12 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 14:29 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-09 13:33 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 16:44 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-11 23:45 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-12 16:46 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-12 15:03 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 20:11 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-14 11:11 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-14 09:18 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 21:31 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-15 12:50 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-12 10:12 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-04-12 20:06 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-15 00:48 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-15 18:03 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-16 08:58 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 02:00 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-16 19:11 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 09:57 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 13:01 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-17 07:17 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 21:44 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-17 14:08 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-17 11:35 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-04-17 17:55 +0100
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-18 06:00 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-17 22:40 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-18 09:15 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-17 20:03 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-17 19:32 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-18 01:36 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 18:46 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-17 22:36 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-18 11:01 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-18 11:33 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-18 11:21 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-18 10:59 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-18 16:02 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-18 23:47 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-04-18 18:49 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-19 18:52 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-19 23:39 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 16:45 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 16:57 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-20 12:25 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-16 08:34 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 09:59 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 13:09 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-16 13:17 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-16 11:29 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-16 19:13 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-16 13:20 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 14:33 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 17:11 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rjac@TheWor1d.com> - 2018-04-16 14:45 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 The Jews <jews@world-doomination.org> - 2018-04-16 17:11 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-17 01:34 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 13:04 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 17:07 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 16:59 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-16 22:31 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 15:46 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 20:50 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 21:46 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-17 05:52 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 21:14 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-18 12:47 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rjac@TheWor1d.com> - 2018-04-16 14:43 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 The Jews <jews@world-doomination.org> - 2018-04-16 17:13 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sick old pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron (aka "Ron Jacobson") <fsturluogh5@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 08:27 +0000
Al Gore fangirl, "kensi", taps out. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-16 15:25 -0700
Re: Al Gore fangirl, "kensi", taps out. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 21:51 -0500
Re: Al Gore fangirl, "kensi", taps out. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-04-16 22:24 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-04-18 00:22 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 21:39 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-04-18 05:21 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 13:37 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-18 14:55 -0600
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-18 23:48 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-18 18:56 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-19 11:44 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-19 18:52 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-18 11:06 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-18 11:34 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 12:20 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-16 19:14 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 14:56 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 17:13 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-09 04:33 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 06:17 +1000
Does smoking cause cancer? (was: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-09 01:43 +0200
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 09:57 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-09 02:02 +0200
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 10:12 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-08 19:36 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-09 03:45 +0200
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-08 23:50 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 20:12 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 11:40 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-08 23:56 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-09 14:05 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 11:27 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 07:36 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 17:01 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 08:14 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 21:09 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-10 08:34 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-10 04:51 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 11:52 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 17:22 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 07:36 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 17:13 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 08:23 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 19:43 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 11:02 +1000
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-10 04:58 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-10 04:40 -0400
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 21:08 -0500
Re: Does smoking cause cancer? Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 12:40 +1000
Ben Jacoby is neither funny nor informative, nothing good. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-09 19:54 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-08 19:34 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-09 10:52 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rjac@TheWor1d.com> - 2018-04-09 07:59 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "Michael Ejercito" <mejercit@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 11:05 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-04-09 19:19 +0100
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 13:36 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 17:34 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-09 16:58 -0500
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 The Equalizer <coming4you@never.invalid.net> - 2018-04-09 22:58 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 17:39 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 @ "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rjac@TheWor1d.com> - 2018-04-09 13:05 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 @ Sick old pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron (aka "Ron Jacobson") <fsturluogh5@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 21:27 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 @ "Michael Ejercito" <mejercit@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-11 10:27 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Ser Gregor Clegane <sergregor@lannistermail.raven> - 2018-04-10 11:25 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2018-04-10 16:48 +0100
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 08:50 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-04-10 16:58 +0100
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-11 23:47 +0000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-11 17:53 -0600
In some Turkish bazar, somewhere... Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-09 10:04 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-04-10 08:14 +1000
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-10 04:53 -0400
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 "max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> - 2018-04-07 07:57 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-04-07 22:41 -0700
Re: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988 James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 10:46 -0700
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
| From | Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-17 21:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.35406bd6ed47fbda99377a@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #681488 |
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate! In article <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, ww84wa@aim.com says... > > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: > > >On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: > >> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World > >> shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad thing, > > > >Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but really, he's > >a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly fantasize > >about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. > > Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to rid > the world of 6.5 billion living souls. > > Number one on their list: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones > Inscriptions > 1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with > nature. > > How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are Ko0kstones. -- Checkmate ® Author, Humorist, Cynic Philosopher, Humanitarian Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars Copyright © 2018 all rights reserved In loving memory of The Battle Kitten May 2010-February 12, 2017 "There are many here among us, who feel that life is but a joke."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 05:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681490 |
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, > ww84wa@aim.com says... > > > >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: >> >> >On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >> >> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World >> >> shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad >> >> thing, >> > >> >Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but really, >> >he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly >> >fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. >> >> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to rid >> the world of 6.5 billion living souls. >> >> Number one on their list: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. >> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. >> >> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? > > Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are > Ko0kstones. However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass depopulation" plans for decades. -- -v
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 13:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.35412e03fd0e8f1f99377c@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #681495 |
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate! In article <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me>, vallor@cultnix.org says... > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > Checkmate! In article <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, > > ww84wa@aim.com says... > > > > > > > >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: > >> > >> >On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: > >> >> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World > >> >> shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad > >> >> thing, > >> > > >> >Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but really, > >> >he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly > >> >fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. > >> > >> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to rid > >> the world of 6.5 billion living souls. > >> > >> Number one on their list: > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. > >> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. > >> > >> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? > > > > Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are > > Ko0kstones. > > However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass > depopulation" plans for decades. Same with Bigfoot, yet no one has ever caught or killed one, and no bodies of old dead ones have ever been found. We never walked on the moon, no planes ever hit the towers because it was all done with CGI. There's no shortage of conspiracy theorists. The most vocal ones have found ways to profit from them. There will be a mass culling, either by plague or war, most likely. Human population is unsustainable at these levels. To many people fighting over a finite amount of resources. Nature always rebalances things that are out of whack, sooner or later. -- Checkmate ® Author, Humorist, Cynic Philosopher, Humanitarian Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars Copyright © 2018 all rights reserved In loving memory of The Battle Kitten May 2010-February 12, 2017 "There are many here among us, who feel that life is but a joke."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 14:55 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <l4cfddhsm6jmbipme2jrer8pgjlv6ijjpl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #681593 |
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:37:49 -0700, Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> wrote: >Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate! In >article <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me>, vallor@cultnix.org says... > > >> >> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >> > Checkmate! In article <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, >> > ww84wa@aim.com says... >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: >> >> >> >> >On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >> >> >> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World >> >> >> shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad >> >> >> thing, >> >> > >> >> >Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but really, >> >> >he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly >> >> >fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. >> >> >> >> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to rid >> >> the world of 6.5 billion living souls. >> >> >> >> Number one on their list: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. >> >> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. >> >> >> >> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? >> > >> > Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are >> > Ko0kstones. >> >> However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass >> depopulation" plans for decades. > >Same with Bigfoot, yet no one has ever caught or killed one, and no bodies of old dead >ones have ever been found. We never walked on the moon, no planes ever hit the towers >because it was all done with CGI. There's no shortage of conspiracy theorists. The most >vocal ones have found ways to profit from them. > >There will be a mass culling, either by plague or war, most likely. Human population is >unsustainable at these levels. To many people fighting over a finite amount of >resources. Nature always rebalances things that are out of whack, sooner or later. Wait, no bigfoot? What's that smelly, hairy old thing I stored in my barn?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 23:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8lgd$120$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681596 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:55:26 -0600, Skeeter wrote: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:37:49 -0700, Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >>Checkmate! In article <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me>, vallor@cultnix.org >>says... >> >> >> >>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>> >>> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>> > by Checkmate! In article >>> > <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, ww84wa@aim.com says... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >>> >> >> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third >>> >> >> World shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably >>> >> >> not a bad thing, >>> >> > >>> >> >Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but >>> >> >really, >>> >> >he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly >>> >> >fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. >>> >> >>> >> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to >>> >> rid the world of 6.5 billion living souls. >>> >> >>> >> Number one on their list: >>> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. >>> >> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with >>> >> nature. >>> >> >>> >> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? >>> > >>> > Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are >>> > Ko0kstones. >>> >>> However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass >>> depopulation" plans for decades. >> >>Same with Bigfoot, yet no one has ever caught or killed one, and no >>bodies of old dead ones have ever been found. We never walked on the >>moon, no planes ever hit the towers because it was all done with CGI. >>There's no shortage of conspiracy theorists. The most vocal ones have >>found ways to profit from them. >> >>There will be a mass culling, either by plague or war, most likely. >>Human population is unsustainable at these levels. To many people >>fighting over a finite amount of resources. Nature always rebalances >>things that are out of whack, sooner or later. > > > Wait, no bigfoot? What's that smelly, hairy old thing I stored in my > barn? Your wife. <snicker> -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 18:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pb8lvb$1es$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #681608 |
On 4/18/2018 6:48 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:55:26 -0600, Skeeter wrote: > >> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:37:49 -0700, Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >>> Checkmate! In article <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me>, vallor@cultnix.org >>> says... >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>> >>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>>>> by Checkmate! In article >>>>> <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, ww84wa@aim.com says... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third >>>>>>>> World shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably >>>>>>>> not a bad thing, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but >>>>>>> really, >>>>>>> he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly >>>>>>> fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. >>>>>> >>>>>> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to >>>>>> rid the world of 6.5 billion living souls. >>>>>> >>>>>> Number one on their list: >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. >>>>>> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with >>>>>> nature. >>>>>> >>>>>> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? >>>>> >>>>> Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are >>>>> Ko0kstones. >>>> >>>> However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass >>>> depopulation" plans for decades. >>> >>> Same with Bigfoot, yet no one has ever caught or killed one, and no >>> bodies of old dead ones have ever been found. We never walked on the >>> moon, no planes ever hit the towers because it was all done with CGI. >>> There's no shortage of conspiracy theorists. The most vocal ones have >>> found ways to profit from them. >>> >>> There will be a mass culling, either by plague or war, most likely. >>> Human population is unsustainable at these levels. To many people >>> fighting over a finite amount of resources. Nature always rebalances >>> things that are out of whack, sooner or later. >> >> >> Wait, no bigfoot? What's that smelly, hairy old thing I stored in my >> barn? > > Your wife. > > <snicker> > HA! good one
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 11:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <%P2CC.2256$c94.744@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #681608 |
On 4/18/2018 7:48 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:55:26 -0600, Skeeter wrote: > >> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:37:49 -0700, Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >>> Checkmate! In article <pb6kkf$l0g$1@dont-email.me>, vallor@cultnix.org >>> says... >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 21:39:25 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>> >>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>>>> by Checkmate! In article >>>>> <nrhdddd3f3639qeqb3jok97nubcgdkm55k@4ax.com>, ww84wa@aim.com says... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third >>>>>>>> World shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably >>>>>>>> not a bad thing, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but >>>>>>> really, >>>>>>> he's a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly >>>>>>> fantasize about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. >>>>>> >>>>>> Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to >>>>>> rid the world of 6.5 billion living souls. >>>>>> >>>>>> Number one on their list: >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones Inscriptions 1. >>>>>> Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with >>>>>> nature. >>>>>> >>>>>> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? >>>>> >>>>> Not by erecting "guidestones" to advertise their intents. Those are >>>>> Ko0kstones. >>>> >>>> However, there have been "rumors" (CT's, really) about "mass >>>> depopulation" plans for decades. >>> >>> Same with Bigfoot, yet no one has ever caught or killed one, and no >>> bodies of old dead ones have ever been found. We never walked on the >>> moon, no planes ever hit the towers because it was all done with CGI. >>> There's no shortage of conspiracy theorists. The most vocal ones have >>> found ways to profit from them. >>> >>> There will be a mass culling, either by plague or war, most likely. >>> Human population is unsustainable at these levels. To many people >>> fighting over a finite amount of resources. Nature always rebalances >>> things that are out of whack, sooner or later. >> >> >> Wait, no bigfoot? What's that smelly, hairy old thing I stored in my >> barn? > > Your wife. > > <snicker> > Chortle! Excellent comeback, Nads! Hey, I'm an honest conservative. I give credit even to idiot lefty libs when they pull a good slam.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 18:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ou3iddtadlrktc4r82mtkdvi4d8kgcjc5b@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #681608 |
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 23:48:29 -0000 (UTC), Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> wrote: >On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:55:26 -0600, Skeeter wrote: <...> >> Wait, no bigfoot? What's that smelly, hairy old thing I stored in my >> barn? > >Your wife. > ><snicker> Misogynist creep! -- Yours Truly, Gregory Hall "Tsk, tsk. No one appreciates his brilliance, poor fellow. (There might be a message in that for him.)"--Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries http://apprhondaleahkirkfries.blogspot.com/2014/05/rhonda-leah-kirk-fries-interview.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 11:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <H9JBC.3872$yc1.747@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #681488 |
On 4/18/2018 12:22 AM, Wally W. wrote: > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:17:39 -0400, kensi wrote: > >> On 4/16/2018 1:09 PM, benj wrote: >>> Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World >>> shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad thing, >> >> Everyone talks about how awful and terrible Hitler was, but really, he's >> a piker compared to present-day conservatives, who regularly fantasize >> about the "ethnic cleansing" of 1.2 *billion* people. > > Those who are more equal than others have a grander vision to to rid > the world of 6.5 billion living souls. > > Number one on their list: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones > Inscriptions > 1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with > nature. > > How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? > > "kensi"-Nads propose to do this like they did in their "utopias" the USSR and Mao's China, but luckily for the rest of us, we are aware that the liberal domination of Darwin Awards can go a long way toward achieving the goal!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 11:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pb7oh7$e30$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #681555 |
On 4/18/2018 11:06 AM, benj wrote: > On 4/18/2018 12:22 AM, Wally W. wrote: >> 1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with >> nature. >> >> How do you suppose they intend to **maintain** this level? > > "kensi"-Nads propose to do this like they did in their "utopias" the > USSR and Mao's China, A lie. -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-16 12:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pb2m0m$h6m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #681266 |
On 4/16/2018 12:09 PM, benj wrote: > On 4/16/2018 10:59 AM, Sergio wrote: >> On 4/15/2018 5:34 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 13/04/2018 10:06 AM, Scout wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:fj7mk1FnuahU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 10/04/2018 2:05 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>> On 4/8/2018 11:10 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 9/04/2018 1:46 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>> On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is >>>>>>>>>> science >>>>>>>>>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *snicker* >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent >>>>>>>> wishing for >>>>>>>> people dead! You all need to be banned! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old >>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>> smoked their whole life who don't have it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Again: Tobacco does not "cause cancer". >>>>>> >>>>>> wrong. Tobacco companies were sued and lost because tobacco causes >>>>>> cancer. >>>>> >>>>> **Wrong. Tobacco does not cause cancer. CONSUMPTION of tobacco can >>>>> lead to an increase in the likelihood that a human may develop a >>>>> tobacco related cancer or some other tobacco related disease. >>>> >>>> Exactly, there is no evidence of causality, you merely have a >>>> correlation. >>> >>> **Not quite. I was careful to state that tobacco (on it's own) does not >>> cause cancer. However, CONSUMPTION of tobacco products increases the >>> likelihood that a person will contract one of a number of diseases that >>> are much rarer in the population that does not use tobacco products. For >>> instance, in the US: >>> >>> * Smoking is responsible for 90% of all lung cancer deaths. >>> * Smoking is responsible for 80% of all deaths from chronic obstructive >>> pulmonary disease. >>> * Smoking is estimated to increase the risk of coronary heart disease by >>> 2 to 4 times. >>> * Smoking is estimated to increase the risk of stroke by 2 to 4 times. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Might have nothing to due with tobacco at all but might be related to >>>> another issue entirely,. >>> >>> >>> **Sure, but the probability of acquiring a smoking related disease is >>> much, MUCH greater if one smokes or uses other tobacco products (like >>> chewing tobacco). Use of any tobacco products can increase the >>> likelihood that one will acquire one of these diseases. >>> >>> >> >> "You have probably heard plenty of reasons not to smoke or use other >> tobacco products, but here is one more: The tobacco used to make these >> tobacco products contains small amounts of radionuclides. About 20 >> percent of all deaths in the United States are from tobacco use and >> diseases caused by smoking each year - that's around 440,000 people. >> Cigarettes kill more Americans than alcohol, car accidents, suicide, >> AIDS, homicide and illegal drugs combined. >> Tobacco plant. >> >> The sticky underside of tobacco leaves hold radionuclides that come from >> fertilizer. >> >> Toxic chemicals in tobacco smoke are the main reason cigarettes cause >> cancer, but radiation also plays a part. Cigarette smokers inhale >> radionuclides that build up over time in the lungs and other parts of >> the body. Smokers are not the only ones affected by the radiation in >> cigarettes. Nearby non-smokers inhale the radionuclides as well." >> >> https://www3.epa.gov/radtown/tobacco.html >> > Eeew! While killing 20% of the population (especially in Third World > shitholes where people smoke like chimneys) is arguably not a bad thing, > common sense tells us that a big increase in tobacco plant taxes can > save the planet. > > Wait, if we consider the above science it is clear that FOOD causes > cancer! That is settled science! The answer is clearly expanding the > tobacco tax to a universal plant tax on all food. I love it when I get > rolling. "kensi" and Nads may make be an honorary Lib yet! Food is loaded with cheap salt, cheap sugar, to add taste but more to preserve the food on the shelf, however too much salt +raise blood pressure, and too much sugar that make people FAT like Nads, and the Gov went along with this, approving of these chemicals to be added into our food. Now they can add a preservative tax. "Frosted RadioNuclides", new cereal with spark!! sugar added as preservative, and fattener.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-16 19:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb2smj$ts$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681271 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:20:21 -0500, Sergio wrote: > FAT like Nads, Proof, kooky? -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-16 14:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pb2v50$10ld$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #681294 |
On 4/16/2018 2:14 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:20:21 -0500, Sergio wrote: > >> FAT like Nads, > > Proof, kooky? > that is self proving; Add together your age, IQ, shoe size and weight (in pounds) and divide by 3.1515926. If over 100 you are FAT.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-16 17:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Nl8BC.15304$xS3.11776@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #681294 |
On 4/16/2018 3:14 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:20:21 -0500, Sergio wrote: > >> FAT like Nads, > > Proof, kooky? > Post real name and address. We will supply true photo op proof to internet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 04:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <paeqfg$tjs$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680404 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Sun, 08 Apr 2018 23:46:30 -0400, benj wrote: > On 4/8/2018 12:29 PM, kensi wrote: >> On 4/8/2018 12:17 PM, benj wrote: >>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science >>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming. >> >> Then you should smoke as many packs a day as you can afford, benj. >> >> *snicker* > > Gave up smoking years ago. You libs are always so violent wishing for > people dead! You all need to be banned! If you think cigarettes are safe, then you cannot interpret kensi's suggestion as a death threat. On the other hand if you think they are unsafe, your post that she was quoting is revealed to be intentionally dishonest ... and by implication, also your climate change denial, thus causing you to have implicitly conceded that human-caused climate warming is happening. Either way, you lose. SPNAK! <snicker> > If Tobacco "causes" cancer then why are there people 100 years old who > smoked their whole life who don't have it. And he flip-flops again! But I'll bite. Perhaps they simply got lucky? > It's funny that science doesn't know what "causes" cancer but you libs > and your fantasies do. Science knows a great deal about what causes cancer. Mutations to somatic cell DNA and epigenetics. Damage to chromosomes. Clonal evolution. Etc. > A modulating factor? maybe. But like all combustion products sucking in > a lot of them is not a good idea. But you scammers never say cut back on > pollution, you all say cut back on CO2 which is of unproven effect. Wrong! > You libs always leave a wide swath of destruction everywhere your > stupidity scorches the earth. No, kooky, it's your smokestacks' emissions that are scorching the earth, but we're going to make you stop. <snicker> -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 06:17 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fivbn0Frk6mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #680327 |
On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote: > On 4/8/2018 2:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 8/04/2018 1:43 AM, benj wrote: >>> On 4/7/2018 10:48 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>> On 4/7/2018 9:33 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>> A 1988 Royal Dutch Shell report recently published online shows >>>>> that the >>>>> company knew decades ago what the impact of climate change would >>>>> be. ... >>>>> The report, titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” said the effects of >>>>> climate >>>>> change would be notable by the late 20th Century and early 21st: >>>>> >>>>> https://globalnews.ca/news/4127757/shell-climate-change-report-1988/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> <yawn> it has been in elementary school textbooks since 1960's >>>> >>> Kensi and journalists lie as always. There could be no such report >>> because "climate change" is a term just recently invented by >>> journalists and other wormballers when the global temperature "hockey >>> stick" stopped going up. >> >> **No, my moronic friend. The first time most of us had heard of >> 'climate change, was back in 1988, when the IPCC (Intergovernmental >> Panel on Climate Change) was formed. Prior to that, we just knew it as >> 'global warming'. The IPCC was formed to determine if there was >> climate change, which way it was headed and what, if anything, can be >> done, or should be done to deal with it. > > Climate has been changing since was climate, **And again, my scientifically ignorant friend: The average temperature of this planet is rising at a rate which is at least 100 times more rapid than at any time in at least the past million years. It is the speed that the warming is occurring that is of most concern. but being used by you > scammers as a propaganda term to cover up the sudden lack of "hockey > stick" is new. I'll wait here while you "prove" you "won" by showing me > how long the words "climate" and"change" have been in the dictionary. > You really are a pathetic crook. **Your answer has already been provided, you moronic cunt. The IPCC was established in 1988. > >> What is a "wormballer"? > > I love making you lib kooks dance! **No, you're just an idiot. A misspelling ropes you in every time > doesn't it? **What is a "wormballer"? If it has been misspelled, then supply the correct spelling. It must be sad to have a life where you total useful > knowledge is spelling, grammar and how to tell lies. **It has nothing to do with grammar and everything to do with attempting to establish what you actually believe. > >>> >>> Expect some Royal Dutch Shell Vice president to sell out and appear >>> all over TV and legacy media telling how oil companies "always" knew >>> selling oil would end all life on the planet. >> >> **Like Exxon's hushed up reports? >> > Got a VP sold out yet to parade on TV? Worked for Tobacco and can work > here, right? **Huh? What the fuck are you talking about? > >> >> Just as they did with cigarettes >>> where they got sell-out VPs to swear tobacco companies always knew >>> their products caused cancer. Lib agenda 101. >> >> **Well, that's not how it went. The tobacco companies swore that their >> products did not harm humans. Some still do. > > Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science > that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming. **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer. SMOKING cigarettes will expose the smoker to a much greater risk of contracting a bunch of smoking related diseases. See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why I know that you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline. You write sloppily and make insane statements, which are trivially easy to demolish. > > Lies are all you know Trevor which is why it is a total waste of time > trying to hold a sane conversation with you. **You are incapable of such a conversation, because that would require you to be sane. Since you aren't, I am the only one left in the conversation who is sane and understands scientific principles. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 01:43 +0200 |
| Subject | Does smoking cause cancer? (was: A Shell report predicted how devastating climate change would be, back in 1988) |
| Message-ID | <2718935.687JKscXgg@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #680358 |
Trevor Wilson amok-crossposted to 3 newsgroups: > On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote: >> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science >> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming. > > **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html > > Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer. JFYI, out of the 98 substances with toxicological properties that are contained in tobacco smoke, like carbon monoxide (Talhout et al., 2011), *at least* 7(!) are carcinogenic (cancer-promoting). In order of decreasing toxicity (IUPAC name in parentheses): Acrolein (propenal), formaldehyde (methanal), acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde (ethanal), ethylene (ethene) oxide, and isoprene (2-methyl-1,3- butadiene) (Cunningham et al., 2011). <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking#Physiology> p. > SMOKING cigarettes will expose the smoker to a much greater risk of > contracting a bunch of smoking related diseases. Because of the above, an increased occurrence of cancer among (heavy) smokers (and, it can be reasonably assumed, *non*-smokers regularly exposed to tobacco smoke) cannot simply be attributed to environmental or secondary health effects. > See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why I know that > you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline. Pot calling the kettle black. For example, livescience.com is _not_ a scientific journal (and known here for oversimplification in at least one of its articles), and the article that you are citing is 10 years(!) old. In order to be considered a scientist, you have to exhibit much more humility and scepticism, and do a lot more research, than you are doing. F‘up2 sci.physics PointedEars -- “Nature uss only the longest threads to weave her patterns so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry.” —Richard Feynman, theoretical physicist, “Messenger Lecture” 1 (1964)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 09:57 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Does smoking cause cancer? |
| Message-ID | <fivoigFu9dpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #680378 |
On 9/04/2018 9:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Trevor Wilson amok-crossposted to 3 newsgroups: > >> On 9/04/2018 2:17 AM, benj wrote: >>> Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science >>> that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming. >> >> **WFT? https://www.livescience.com/3093-smoking-myths-examined.html >> >> Cigarettes don't "cause" cancer. > > JFYI, out of the 98 substances with toxicological properties that are > contained in tobacco smoke, like carbon monoxide (Talhout et al., 2011), > *at least* 7(!) are carcinogenic (cancer-promoting). In order of decreasing > toxicity (IUPAC name in parentheses): > > Acrolein (propenal), formaldehyde (methanal), acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene, > acetaldehyde (ethanal), ethylene (ethene) oxide, and isoprene (2-methyl-1,3- > butadiene) (Cunningham et al., 2011). > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking#Physiology> p. > >> SMOKING cigarettes will expose the smoker to a much greater risk of >> contracting a bunch of smoking related diseases. > > Because of the above, an increased occurrence of cancer among (heavy) > smokers (and, it can be reasonably assumed, *non*-smokers regularly exposed > to tobacco smoke) cannot simply be attributed to environmental or secondary > health effects. > >> See? Your idiotic and inaccurate comment above is exactly why I know that >> you have no knowledge of any scientific discipline. > > Pot calling the kettle black. For example, livescience.com is _not_ a > scientific journal (and known here for oversimplification in at least one of > its articles), and the article that you are citing is 10 years(!) old. > > In order to be considered a scientist, you have to exhibit much more > humility and scepticism, and do a lot more research, than you are doing. **Tell you what: AFTER you critique the prior poster for his inane and completely inaccurate statements (which are numerous and regular), I will express some humility. Particularly with reference to this statement: "Still no proof cigarettes CAUSE cancer anymore than there is science that proves man-made CO2 causes global warming." 'benj' claims to have many science degrees and yet, manages to come out with the insane statement referenced above. So, I ask again: Why critique my (mostly correct) comments and ignore benj's insanity? -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 02:02 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Does smoking cause cancer? |
| Message-ID | <2106680.BjyWNHgNrj@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #680380 |
Trevor Wilson wrote: > So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity? I did not. PointedEars -- Q: What happens when electrons lose their energy? A: They get Bohr'ed. (from: WolframAlpha)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 10:12 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Does smoking cause cancer? |
| Message-ID | <fivpf3FuegiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #680382 |
On 9/04/2018 10:02 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Trevor Wilson wrote: > >> So, I ask again: Why […] ignore benj's insanity? > > I did not. **Then feel free to post your response. I must have missed it. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web