Lacessit

IIRC it was dark blue.

Ad Hominem argument: This fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument.

Your own posts are the evidence, perhaps you are incapable of understanding that.

Consider adding the letters AR to your nom-de-plume.

So far, you have dishonestly attacked me and another poster called Katatonika. It's known as ad hominem argument.

Gazprom claims it was denied essential equipment. When did you start believing what Russians say? Gazprom is part of the Siloviki, their interests and Putin's are not necessarily the same.

At least it made a change from you calling other people names.

Let me know when you cease begging the question, and stop showering abuse on people who are better qualified than you will ever be. You do not respond to requests for your own scientific qualifications and experience. You probably have none. IMO you are simply a dishonest troll.

It's another hypothesis. I don't consider it to be as likely, mainly because the political ramifications of the USA blowing up Russian infrastructure supplying German industry don't even bear thinking about. The massive penalties for breach of contract - apparently billions - would be demanded by the Germans. What illegal sanctions? IIRC it was Russia who illegally annexed Crimea in 2014, then repeated the dose in the Donbas in 2022.

Read the link, it says the deaths were related to heat waves, nothing to do with winter. Sanctions were applied after February 2022, Russia first applied supply limits to Poland and Bulgaria in April, when they refused to pay . Gazprom did not cut off supply through Nordstream until August 22. The tactic backfired when the winter of 22/23 was unusually mild. Facts can be so damn inconvenient.

The most likely hypothesis is Gazprom itself blew up the pipeline in order to avoid massive financial penalties for breach of contract. With the pipeline gone, Gazprom could then invoke force majeure.

I guess it was inevitable there would be a plug for an EV on the thread. Apparently some countries are legislating to have EV's fitted with noisemakers to give advance warning to pedestrians - too silent. Never would be a problem for a V8.

Never owned a V8, closest I got was a 6. I still remember a race between diametrically opposite designs at Sandown race track in Melbourne. A Mini Cooper, and Sir Gawaine Baillie's 7 litre Ford Galaxie V8. It was actually quite comical. In the corners, the Mini would nip inside the Galaxie with a screaming engine. Then they would get to the long straight. The Mini would be about a third of the way up the straight as the Galaxie driver finished fighting a twanging suspension. Once he straightened up, there would be a loud deep throbbing sound as the Ford beat the Mini into the next corner, having given a start of about 150 metres on a 491 metre straight. This went on for about 15 laps. V8's were great to look at and listen to, but they cornered like a piano on castors.

If the OP's Mom and Dad are similar ages, IMO it is highly likely he has found someone in Thailand who is 20, 30 or even 40 years younger, and is enjoying sex with an attractive woman all over again. His lack of interest in the community back home is another pointer, he has a new interest. Not much the OP can do in that kind of situation.

The author, Gale Pooley, is a Professor of Economics. The last person anyone should be consulting on the impact of climate change. When you see a guy talking about an Infinitely Bountiful Planet, he's obviously got his head up his fundament. Obviously, you have drunk his Kool-Aid.

Another look over there post. The title of the thread: " Is global warming still confusing you?" How do you reach the conclusion I don't know cold weather kills more people on the basis I don't mention it? Are you a shill for the fossil fuel industry? Please explain to me how you can pass judgment on my science abilities if you have no qualifications or experience of your own.

Deniers are only interested in cherry-picking data points which support their beliefs, Mike.

Insurance companies have to compete with other insurance companies. They set premiums according to the risk they perceive.

A nothing post is when you say look over there at obesity. Although it is another manifestation of human stupidity. Argument ad hominem is all trolls have got when they have no facts. According to the attached link, more than 61,000 people died from heat-related causes in Europe alone, in 2022. https://www.preventionweb.net/news/risk-heat-related-deaths-has-increased-rapidly-over-past-20-years How about you post your link to the 12,000 Climate-related deaths you are claiming.

Insurance companies and coastal councils don't share your opinion.

Models are projections of current data, and the trends of said data. Reality is the fact humans have effected global warming and climate change by burning fossil fuels for 200 years on an industrial scale. If you don't want to acknowledge that fact, you really have your head in the sand. Fossil fuels are used in a multitude of applications - pharmaceuticals, polymers, fertilizers, and base industrial chemicals. However, we simply cannot afford to keep burning them for the sake of electricity and transport. We need to develop alternatives which are more sustainable. Please tell me what your scientific qualifications are, including your understanding of the laws of thermodynamics. You sound to me like proof of the aphorism a little knowledge is dangerous.

Fossil fuels have been the mother's milk of industry, it is time to wean ourselves off them. Conservative models of the Himalayan Plateau indicate by 2050, water flows to the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Mekong rivers will be halved. 2 billion people are sustained by that water, and the models do not include dam projects by the Chinese. I agree the education system is faulty. It does not teach people to recognize "look over there" arguments, or stress the importance of a sound education in physics and chemistry. Much easier to get an Arts degree. The media, in particular the Murdoch media, have been climate change/global warming deniers for more than a decade. Call it scaremongering if you will, the science is on my side.

We humans have managed to shift the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from 280 ppm to 425 ppm in about 200 years, which is a blink of an eye in geological time. That change is showing up as increased air and ocean temperatures. What has most scientists worried is the butterfly effect, first postulated by the German polymath Friedrich Schiller in the 17th century. That is, an apparently insignificant change in one part of the world producing drastic upheaval in another region. It's also known as a Black Swan event. The Siberian and Canadian permafrost regions contain vast quantities of clathrates, which are complexes of water and methane. Clathrates decompose at 1 - 5 C, into their constituent compounds. As a greenhouse gas, methane is 100 times more powerful than CO2 in terms of heat transmission. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, methane in the atmosphere was about 750 parts per billion. As of 2022, it is 1900 ppb. If the permafrost starts melting, or we screw up an operation designed to extract methane as a fuel, we could have a butterfly effect. There's also the albedo of the Greenland icecap as another potential butterfly effect. Don't be so sure climate change can't happen in a hurry. BTW, too much salt is bad for the kidneys.

I didn't think so, a tattooed todger would be extremely painful. What makes yours stand out from the crowd?

When scientists and engineers come up with miracles of modern technology, such as passenger aircraft, PET scans, and smartphones, everyone applauds. When they come up with unpopular information which indicates we are $h!tting in our own nest, many don't want to know.