placeholder

Thank you for your fact-free rebuttal.

Really, the country is being run into the ground? Is Biden's legislation not supported by a majority of the people in the country? Maybe you should focus on age less and on policies more.

Once again making claims of criminality without providing evidence of such.

Actually, it's you who lack even a basic understanding of what you wrote. Your claim that "If it were unambiguous there would be no need for an appeals court." is obviously nonsense.

Sure. You can't think of anyone who repeatedly posted appeals and repeatedly got them shot down by judges because they were baseless? No one comes to mind at all? You've got nothing.

First off, you got his clain wrong. He only addressed climate change in his article. Not other human causes And you also got wrong that the fact that he admitted it. He didn't admit it. He claimed it. And the claim was false. He tried for a setup. In fact, he had to argue with peer reviewers in order to keep the focus solely on climate change. In other words he lied. But like Climategate, this false claim will live on among denialists. despite all the evidence to the contrary. In fact, in the same edition of Nature in which his research was published, 3 other articles also appeared that warned against focusing on climate change as the sole cause of recent disasters.

Hey, I've got some news for you. Donald Trump is far in the lead to be the next Republican candidate for the office of the Presidency? And all you can do is repeat that same foolish cliche about Trump living in the head of his opponents? How unknowledgeable does someone have to be to repeat that nonsense? The answer is simple: extremely.

Only someone utterly unacquainted with the legislation passed in the first 2 years of the Biden administration could accuse Joe Biden of the same old same old.

So much for those who claim that Russia is only defending itself and was provoked into invading Ukraine because of NATO.

Just like the author of this piece in The Telegraph. you blindly accept what Patrick Brown claims. You clearly didn't note my link to the peer reviewers requests to Brown to include other factors in his study and how Brown pushed back against those requests. One reviewer actually thought the Brown's study was so deficient it shouldn't be published.. Here again is a link to the reviewers' critiques and Brown's reply: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06444-3/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6444_MOESM2_ESM.pdf In addition to which, as has already been pointed out, in that same edition of Nature, there were 3 articles that addressed the issue of being overly simplistic about ascribing extreme weather and disastrous consequences solely to climate change. In other words, Patrick Brown is a liar.

Is this the end of the hydrogen highway? A legislative fight over funding for hydrogen stations could be the fuel’s last gasp for passenger vehicles. The stations are also expensive: The Energy Commission notes that building a hydrogen fueling station costs $6.5 million, while an EV charging station costs about $110,000. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/15/california-hydrogen-cars-00111323#:~:text=Part of the reason hydrogen,does a battery electric one.

And when I offer my evidence, will you acknowledge it or just evaporate?

You claimed that 50% of the cabinet was Jewish. Actually, it's less than 20%. If your case is so strong, why do you make up falsehoods?

Spoken like a true and vicious anti-semite. Here is a link to a lost of the 26 members of Biden's cabinet. I count 5 who are Jewish. https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/cabinet/

What makes your argument nonsensical is that when Jews were persecuted the most, they were mostly poor and confined to ghettos in Europe or lived in small villages in the Pale. It's only recently, as persecution lessened that Jews have found disproportionate success in the sciences, the arts, business, and government.

Actually there is a small but significant connection between solar activity and warming. When more sunspots are created the climate does warm a bit. The problem is that as global warming began to rise sharply, solar activity, i.e. sunspots creation, actually plunged. Until recently, solar activity was very low. So, if anything, the sun exerted a lowering effect on temperature. Despite which, the average temperature actually rose.

We are awaiting confirmation from UK residents to confirm that.

What makes your opinion about the Muslims persecuting the Jews nonsensical is that Jewish communities thrived and prospered in the Middle east in Egypt, and what is now Iraq and Morocco for over a thousand years. And the same goes for the time when the Arabs held suzerainty over Spain. You clearly don't know that when the Christian armies in Spain finally defeated the Muslims and expelled those Jews who survived the Christians murderous ways, hundreds of thousands of Jews were welcomed by Turkey, a Muslim nation. When the Nazis rounded up Albanian Jews, those who survived to return to their mostly Muslim country, found that all their possessions intact, protected by their Muslim compatriots. And even where Jews were treated disrespectfully, in what is now Iran and Algeria, so were Christians. There was no singling out of Jews. No demonization. No blood libel. That was a Western perversion. So pervasive that it infected the works of Shakespeare and Chaucer amongst others.

Here's a link to the peer reviewers comments that show the emptiness of Patrick Brown's claim of bias. And Patrick Brown's replies. You will see that he argued against making the research more inclusive. https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06444-3/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6444_MOESM2_ESM.pdf

Given that your premise is false, why does it matter at all?

No. I caught your point. Things are bad enough in Gaza for the Palestinians without invoking the Holocaust. You claimed that the experience of those in Gaza was like Auschwitz minus the gas chambers. I showed you what it was like for people who weren't gassed but survived. In other words Auschwitz minus the gas chambers.

Thank you for your detailed and fact-filled rebuttal. Modi fan much? ‘Bharat’ or ‘India’? The Controversy Over Some Hindu Nationalists' Push to Rename India The government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has referred to India as “Bharat” in invites for a dinner party at the upcoming G-20 Summit in New Delhi, a move that has sparked controversy. The invites referred to the President of India, Droupadi Murmu, as “President of Bharat.” News of the invites comes two days after Mohan Bhagwat, the chief of the Hindu nationalist organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, an ideological mentor of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, said in a speech that the country should use the word Bharat instead of India. https://time.com/6310821/bjp-rename-india-bharat/

Conditions are bad enough in the Gaza strip without resorting to such hyperbole. Here is a photo of some Auschwitz survivors https://wagner.edu/holocaust-center/ruchama-rachel-rothstein-rachel-roth/

Yes, Danderman. All you are doing is parroting. You see, there is no such thing as expertise acquired by years of studying and training to learn to the highly technical aspects of climate research. All you have to do is claim to have sat down and have read and analyzed the results for yourself. And when you do, you, like some others here, you will not offer any actual factual rebuttals of what these reports show, but, instead you will demonstrate your mastery by offering all sorts of accusations and slurs. You will prove your mastery of the subject by offering 0 fact-based rebuttals of the scientific conclusions of climatologists. You will offer rants instead of engaging with the science. And that is how you will demonstrate your mastery of the subject. Of course, this demonstrated mastery will be indistinguishable from a rebuttal offered by someone with no knowledge of the subject, but the crucial fact is that we will accept your word because you say that you have done the research. And just because you offer no hard scientific evidence to back your case, or, for that matter, any familiarity with the research, that is no reason to doubt your word. Because you are you.

Every time I catch you out, all you respond with is an empty insult. You've got nothing.