Bkk Brian

Calling this murderer a Jesus Freak who claimed to have an understanding with Jesus that allowed him to attack others.....ok if you want to be woke then so be it. He is anything but Christian

Why would you talk about forum moderation rules. Feel free to expand. I stated that if I posted some of his extreme hate speech attacks on those who stood up for Pride they would be deleted. What makes you think they wouldn't when they are riddled with profane language and threats?

What position would that be JonnyF. Enlighten me……….

Quote where I have tarred everyone with the same brush. I am certainly tarring him

He is a Jesus freak and I am more than happy to call him that when he has murdered an innocent 66 year old woman and the attacks he made on his feed he justified by those beliefs. A complete nutcase. I would post examples but they would be deleted.

Yes a Jesus freak. Justifying his hate speech by referring to Jesus and religion

Just spent a few mins looking on his social feed. Aside from the extreme hate speech, homophobic rants etc. he was also a Jesus freak. He had his own understanding with him. He was anti abortion, a few posts of his attacking anyone who agreed with it.

Just spent a few mins looking on his social feed. Aside from the extreme hate speech, homophobic rants etc. he was also a Jesus freak. He had his own understanding with him. He was anti abortion, a few posts of his attacking anyone who agreed with it.

I was hoping you had but obviously not. You talk about risk and how she could have reduced it. How do you know how she confronted this man? What was said? How do you know she did not intend to call the police before she got murdered?

Back to victim blaming yet again.

So all pride flags should be hidden even though they are on your own property, cause you know it reduces the risk of getting murdered. This nutter was also homophobic, perhaps all gays should keep their sexuality hidden to. You know, no holding hands in public as you may get murdered.

Welcome to the board newbie. you got a link to that piece of disinformation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_last_2,000_years

The questioning whether he was after any flag better look at his twitter feed. It’s still up. Not only was he anti trans, homophobic, antisemitic, anti vax and anti Biden but the Pride flag was a prime target for him. https://x.com/travisikeguchi/

I was responding to 0james0 because of his trolling remarks, stating to a male poster "Fair enough young lady" But since you're now trolling to I'll leave you to it.

There you go, more dishonesty from you. We believe the consensus of scientific opinion published in numerous outlets that provide facts and evidence that can be scrutinized not just MSM And all you have is belief and prayer since you have no credible sources that you've posted, at least not yet, still waiting.

Yes totally pointless Crichton's article was placed there by the author Mark J. Perry to debunk the NASA link and failed on all scores. Still waiting for some credible peer reviewed scientific studies if you want to debate.

"No, I'm not going to let you back out of answering" Where does Crichton's short article debunk https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ You know, the one referenced in the link were his article is and that Red Phoenix's post left out? It was the whole point of placing Crichton's fiction there to debunk it by the author Mark J. Perry. So explain how is it debunked?

Did you also know that: "Russia conducted an anti-satellite missile test in November 2021 that has seen debris come close to the ISS orbit and require the crews to shelter in place; at the time, NASA and the United States expressed displeasure with the situation."

Indeed. Sources that also make their living from climate change hysteria. Do you have a list of those?

That single reference does not at all relate to the Crichton material supplied by Red Phoenix, which was solely dedicated to the topic of consensus specifically as it is used to insinuate something as fact and true merely due to the agreement of parties. So tell me, why on earth would I debate a critical piece on Scientific Consensus written by a well known fiction writer where the article uses NASA as his link to disparage and fails miserably. The facts are all in the link https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ He has not in any way debunked any of those facts contained. Michael Crichton, world’s most famous global warming denier, dies Then he used his fame in the most destructive way possible — to cast doubt on the overwhelming scientific understanding of global warming, to urge people not to take action against the gravest preventable threat to the health and well-being of future generations. In 2004, he published State of Fear, a deeply flawed novel that attacks climate science and climate scientists. Although a work of fiction, the book had a clear political agenda, as evidenced by Crichton’s December 7, 2004 press release: https://archive.thinkprogress.org/michael-crichton-worlds-most-famous-global-warming-denier-dies-147caec78b70/ If you want to debate, link to credible peer reviewed studies from climate scientists that have sources attached and I'll be more than happy to do so.

I don't read opinion articles unless they link to credible sources. I leave the fiction to Crichton to sell his books on climate change denialism.

I tend never to ignore posts but I do point out the facts and provided the links to debunk Crichton essays. All the info is there if you care to read, you obviously haven't otherwise why ask me?

Oh dear, I'll address again where you accuse me of being dishonest again: My quote was four sentences, it did not include a copied headline The Climategate prefix was mine. if I had added a headline the quote would have been with 3 sentences. "27. You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Only post a link, the headline and three sentences from the article. Content in the public domain is limited to the same restrictions." Enough of your off topic diversion. Its all you've got in that post. The link you provided on Climategate has already had eight committees investigate the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. You've got zero.

I had no intention of thanking you for stating that Presidents lie, its a well known fact, Bush and Blair come to mind and I have no doubt Biden has stretched the truth on economic matters. The big lie is still ongoing from one of them along with 30K+ others. However this again is about whether to believe Tapper's statement which I do. "I don't know if he was lying but this blind spot was a problem"

I noticed your deflection from my post subject matter and topic that's why I mentioned it so you could read it again, your welcome.