Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > talk.politics.guns > #1152023
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | talk.politics.guns, comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics, alt.checkmate |
| Subject | Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. |
| Date | 2018-12-30 19:20 -0800 |
| Organization | n/a |
| Message-ID | <q0c1ul$9mk$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <bcci2etdlqerapk58sc7vmb1l5j00s848j@4ax.com> <g8sss9Fq0r1U31@mid.individual.net> <rvli2ehh6b04n5d2kng6982sbsbpf6j9sn@4ax.com> <g8t3riFreolU3@mid.individual.net> <sn1j2elje27mlrtnm7due53tsnshkt74ni@4ax.com> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 12/30/2018 7:04 PM, Wally W. wrote: > On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 16:49:06 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 12/30/18 4:44 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>> On 30 Dec 2018 21:50:01 GMT, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>> On 30 Dec 2018 20:52:17 GMT, Snit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 30 Dec 2018 16:08:33 GMT, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:52:12 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/29/18 7:37 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:33:00 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/29/18 7:12 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 21:25:59 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 9:19 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 20:37:43 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 8:18 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 19:02:33 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 6:49 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 17:00:31 -0700, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 4:58 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snit replied: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly and wastefully so: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/02/07/the-great-delusion/#more-12926> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?We go out of our course to make ourselves uncomfortable; the cup of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> life is not bitter enough to our palate, and we distill superfluous >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> poison to put into it, or conjure up hideous things to frighten >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ourselves at, which would never exist if we did not make them.? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In centuries hence the global warming boogey man will be seen for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly what it is ? The Great Delusion. Future generations will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wonder how so many people could have believed something so suicidally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you deny climate science. Good to know. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you spew non sequiturs. Not necessarily good to know, just an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "deny climate science," I say the FUD derived from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> climastrology is a crock. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is climastrology? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was invented to make astrology look respectable. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Never heard of it... but I tend to stick to science and avoid astrology >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the like. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And do you accept the view of every single scientific organization on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the planet? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is ***the*** view of "every single scientific organization on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planet?" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From that link: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? Earth's climate has warmed significantly since the late 1800s, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? Human activities (primarily greenhouse gas emissions) are the primary >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cause, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? Continuing emissions will increase the likelihood and severity of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> global effects, and that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? People could manage future climate change impacts through intense >>>>>>>>>>>>>> efforts at reducing further warming while preparing for any unavoidable >>>>>>>>>>>>>> climate changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where do you claim that single, monolithic view exists in the wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> See the quote, above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Compare with: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/04/07/asking-the-wrong-question/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To ferociously insist ? as politicians and activists do ? that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man-made climate change is real is meaningless. That remark is worthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a child. It demonstrates no sophistication whatsoever. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is on the list of fewer than 70 scientists who deny the general view: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I never said those folks did not. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> There are longer lists, including: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.petitionproject.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting how you did not fact check your claim: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/ >>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>> What's True >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> A petition that has been in circulation since 1998 claims to bear the >>>>>>>>>>>> name of more than 30,000 signatures from scientists who reject the >>>>>>>>>>>> concept of anthropogenic global warming. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What's False >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The petition was created by individuals and groups with political >>>>>>>>>>>> motivations, was distributed using misleading tactics, is presented with >>>>>>>>>>>> almost no accountability regarding the authenticity of its signatures, >>>>>>>>>>>> and asks only that you have received an undergraduate degree in any >>>>>>>>>>>> science to sign. >>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/sep/08/blog-posting/no-30000-scientists-have-not-said-climate-change-h/ >>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>>> First of all, the meaning of "scientist" is vague. The minimum >>>>>>>>>>>> requirement is a bachelor?s of science degree. That?s no guarantee that >>>>>>>>>>>> the person studied a science related to climate change, or that the >>>>>>>>>>>> person pursued a career in science. The petition?s website says that >>>>>>>>>>>> 12,715 signers hold "BS or equivalent academic degrees." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> When we look at the number of people with some sort of background in >>>>>>>>>>>> fields that tie directly to climate change, the petition website said, >>>>>>>>>>>> "there are 3,805 scientists trained in specialties directly related to >>>>>>>>>>>> the physical environment of the Earth." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That would be about 12 percent of the total. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There are, according to the site, 9,029 people with PhDs, which comes >>>>>>>>>>>> closer to meeting a higher bar for being thought of as a scientist. >>>>>>>>>>>> Based on the site?s figures, most of them don?t specialize in climate >>>>>>>>>>>> change, but they likely are more familiar with scientific methods. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> These important nuances get lost. A 2012 opinion piece in Forbes >>>>>>>>>>>> described the signers as "more than 31,000 American scientists from >>>>>>>>>>>> diverse climate-related disciplines." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That?s way off the mark, unless you count veterinarians -- one of the >>>>>>>>>>>> degrees that qualifies you as a scientist in the petition project -- and >>>>>>>>>>>> physicians. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> We also don?t know much about when people signed the petition. The >>>>>>>>>>>> website tells us that thousands of signatures came in 1998 and 1999 when >>>>>>>>>>>> the petition was first circulated. It also says, "The majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>> current listed signatories signed or re-signed the petition after >>>>>>>>>>>> October 2007." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is, the scientific consensus on mankind?s role in climate >>>>>>>>>>>> change has grown over time. Even if more than half of the signers came >>>>>>>>>>>> after that date, it doesn?t mean that those who came before remain >>>>>>>>>>>> skeptical of climate change. >>>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> How many of "every single scientific organization on the planet" have >>>>>>>>>>> *any* expertise in climastrology? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is EVERY SINGLE ONE with a comment. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyone can make a comment. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So even if some who have a >>>>>>>>>> comment are not ones we should see as reputable on the topic, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ... you cite them anyway. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> every >>>>>>>>>> single one we SHOULD count as reputable on the topic accepts the general >>>>>>>>>> consensus. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why do opinions of people without qualifications in an area with no >>>>>>>>> relevance to their training or work have any weight with you? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To be fair, there are likely some in those ranks who do not accept it... >>>>>>>>>> more than the 70 or so listed, but only those fewer than 70 are known to >>>>>>>>>> actively reject it >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ... counted by whom? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and deny the general consensus. And some of them are >>>>>>>>>> no longer alive... so they may very well have accepted the growing >>>>>>>>>> consensus. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Bottom line: one has to HEAVILY hand pick to find scientists who reject >>>>>>>>>> the general consensus >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What "general consensus?" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why must you walk-back a scientific, fact-based "consensus" with the >>>>>>>>> qualitative weasel-word "general?" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If one isn't a closed-minded greenie, one only needs to listen when >>>>>>>>> people make themselves known. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "You can observe a lot by just watching." - Yogi Berra >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The people who are brave enough to buck a fraudlant "consensus" are >>>>>>>>> more worthy of a hearing than those who cave to the pressure to >>>>>>>>> conform. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <https://www.inquisitr.com/1299796/climate-change-editorial-gets-professor-fired-from-think-tank/> >>>>>>>>> If people ever say that fears of censorship for ?climate change? views >>>>>>>>> are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I >>>>>>>>> published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be >>>>>>>>> allowed the ?all of the above? energy strategy we have in the U.S., >>>>>>>>> the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship >>>>>>>>> with them? because my analysis and theirs ?diverge.? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> based on very strong evidence. And I am sure you >>>>>>>>>> can find some scientists who insist man never made it to the moon. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> False analogy. Not even a good try. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But that didn't stop you from claiming them, did it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The analogy is excellent. There is amazingly strong evidence man went to >>>>>>>> the but surely you can find some educated people who say otherwise. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is weak in the reason for denial though ? multinational massive >>>>>>>> corporations are not funding the denial to offer short term benefits for >>>>>>>> the very rich. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can deny the science all you want. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What ***the*** science? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is weasely vague and scientifically illiterate to refer to **the** >>>>>>> science that can't make valid predictions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can worship the rich all day. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You don't understand the motivation of your opponents. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will stick to the evidence and go with the science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What "evidence?" How many "tipping points" have come and gone without >>>>>>> the catastrophe predicted by salivating alarmists? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "The warmistas are not just wrong. They are festeringly evil. >>>>>>> They are giggling malevolent monsters, perching and waiting >>>>>>> to feast on the bodies of the people, by the billion, they >>>>>>> hope to kill." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> By the science I mean, of course, the relevant climate science. You reject >>>>>> it. >>>>> >>>>> I reject the alarmist bullshit that the sky is falling and we're all >>>>> gonna die because of ACO2. >>>>> >>>>> Do you understand the difference, or do you think "climate science" >>>>> and the greenie religion are joined at the hip? >>>>> >>>>>> I accept it as what it is ? the best data we currently have and quite >>>>>> reliable. >>>>> >>>>> ... after it was "adjusted" by the Ministry of Truth. >>>>> >>>>>> I also accept germ theory and other areas of science, too. How far do you >>>>>> extend your irrational rejection? >>>>> >>>>> Irrational how? >>>>> >>>>> How rational is it to believe in the *next* tipping point predicted by >>>>> climastrologists when they were wrong every time before? >>>>> >>>>> <https://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Prophets/How.To.ID.False.Prophet.html> >>>>> "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow >>>>> not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not >>>>> spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not >>>>> be afraid of him" >>>>> (Deuteronomy 18:22). >>>>> >>>> >>>> You reject science and point to religion to try to defend your active >>>> ignorance. Got it. >>> >>> I posted guidance on how to spot a false prophet. >>> >>> What excuse to you offer for the numerous failed predictions of your >>> ***the*** science and its doomsaying "consensus?" >>> >> >> I talk about science > > Where? > >> and you deny it and talk about religious things. Sure. > > I talked about valid predictions. > > Climastrologists are not good at making valid predictions. > >> That was pretty much my point. >> >> So what other areas of science do you reject? > > Greenies are confused by the "whooosh" sound they so often hear. > Think of a test community of say, 900 houses coated with solar panels and little windmills in the desert. It works well wrt clearish, windy days and a couple of solar furnaces that generate around 1 megawatt of power each. Keep in mind that each dwelling also creates it own local power: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odeillo_solar_furnace Crap idea, or maybe not wrt experimentation?
Back to talk.politics.guns | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Solastalgia Is The Specific Grief And Anxiety Caused By Climate Change kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-28 11:58 -0500
Re: Solastalgia Is The Specific Grief And Anxiety Caused By Climate Change % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 10:06 -0700
Re: Solastalgia Is The Specific Grief And Anxiety Caused By Climate Change Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-28 10:11 -0700
Re: Solastalgia Is The Specific Grief And Anxiety Caused By Climate Change Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 12:15 -0500
Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-28 14:34 -0800
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 15:47 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 17:53 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 15:57 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 18:09 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:10 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:18 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:23 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:38 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:12 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 18:25 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:36 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 18:08 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:14 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 18:18 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:20 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:27 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:34 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:36 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 18:40 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:54 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:58 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 16:59 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:00 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:13 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:20 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:29 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:33 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:40 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:45 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:46 -0800
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 19:08 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:12 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 19:13 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:23 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 20:00 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 18:05 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 20:12 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 19:13 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 21:23 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 20:27 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 19:06 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:13 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 19:16 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:19 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 19:34 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:39 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 20:04 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 18:12 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 20:17 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 19:13 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. turkey <turkey@invalid.none> - 2018-12-28 21:19 -0500
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 20:35 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:54 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:05 -0700
Re: Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-29 12:36 -0500
Snit's apocalypse cult. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-28 15:58 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:00 -0700
The REAL climate denier. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-28 16:16 -0800
Re: The REAL climate denier. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:18 -0700
Re: The REAL climate denier. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:22 -0800
Science FICTION ( fake news ). Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-28 16:34 -0800
Re: Science FICTION ( fake news ). Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:39 -0700
Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-12-28 16:53 -0800
Re: Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:55 -0700
Re: Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 17:06 -0800
Re: Science FICTION ( fake news ). Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
Re: The REAL climate denier. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:28 -0700
Re: The REAL climate denier. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:51 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 20:49 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 19:02 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 22:18 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 20:37 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 23:19 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 21:25 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-29 21:12 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-29 19:33 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-29 21:37 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-29 19:52 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 10:26 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 16:08 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 13:39 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 20:52 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-30 13:56 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 16:02 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 21:50 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 18:44 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 16:49 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 22:04 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 20:18 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 00:34 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 06:23 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 02:24 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-31 05:51 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:01 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 13:32 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 18:41 +0000
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 13:47 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 11:53 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 15:38 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:43 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-31 12:46 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 13:48 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:56 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:00 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:04 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:16 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:20 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:21 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:23 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:27 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:35 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:42 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:49 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:53 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:14 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:20 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:29 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:32 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:36 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:39 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:12 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:26 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:30 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:38 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:47 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:58 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-30 19:20 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-31 05:46 -0500
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. "Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn>" <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-12-31 11:39 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-31 06:48 -0600
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 16:14 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:28 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:32 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:40 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:44 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:46 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:33 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:02 -0800
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:36 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:45 -0700
Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 18:01 -0700
Re: Solastalgia Is The Specific Grief And Anxiety Caused By Climate Change "Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn>" <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-12-28 11:29 -0800
csiph-web