On Nov 30, 1:44*pm, JohnM wrote:
On Nov 30, 5:48*pm, Claudius Denk wrote:



On Nov 30, 5:35*am, JohnM wrote:

On Nov 30, 9:32*am, richp wrote:

On Nov 29, 11:59*pm, Fran wrote:

On Nov 30, 6:54*pm, Claudius Denk wrote:

On Nov 29, 10:40 pm, Professional data rigger wrote:

Xenu wrote:

Vengance is ours. * We win!!

All our enemies will pay for their crimes, including those of you in
alt.global-warming who are part of the socialist cabal.

Day 10 and counting, and still no evidence against man-made global
warming, you AGW deniers must be getting really desperate so it seems.

If it's us skeptics that are desperate then why is it you alarmists
that refuse debate?

Kinda don't make sense do it? *

It makes perfect sense. We know that you are sen as nuts, so why would
we bother? You on the other hand know that we have won, which is why
you're desperate to pretend there's still a need to debate.
Debating a denialist is like debating a right wing nutcase politician

As we know to our frustration by constantly debating them into a
corner here on alt.g-w.

Show us one instance where this is the case, you lieing jackass.

You are free to read any of my exchanges with denialists, from 2006
on, here at alt.g-w. As you will see, they always descend into
triviality when presented with indisputable facts.

••*But now, Morgan, what you call "indisputable facts"
turned out to be cookbook trash!!

—*—
| In real science the burden of proof is always
| on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
| neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
| iota of valid data for global warming nor have
| they provided data that climate change is being
| effected by commerce and industry, and not by
| natural phenomena