One less GW prick to fill the media with scare stories, Stephen Schnider is dead:
-
Pretty much what Ian said: sometimes you are better to think something than to say it.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
A good man dies and this is your response?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
A good man dies
Good? What, a lying fraudulent scare mongering alarmist hypocrite you mean? Whos fat arse spent more hours in airplanes and limosines than you or I will ever do, all in the name of reducing CO2? Ha, dont make me laugh! You know he is the guy who used heavies to shut up a reporter at a conference recently? Using physical violence to supress alternative points of view? You expect me to feel sympathy? He is the guy who said "98% of all published articles on climate are pro GW therefore it is proved". You call this scientific proof when dissenters DONT get their work published because of the strangle hold he and his like have had over the scientific journals? This cunt, and Mann and Hansen are 'evil' if its a term you want to use. You know DDT? Banned. Yet in so doing milions have died since of malaria. A propper investigaiton of its use (and it has now bee authorised again by the WHO) would have avoided this, yet the alarmist enviros got it stopped outright. And so with GW. Lets just say that these clowns succeed in driving CO2 back to 250 ppm and then temperature does nothing (which is likely). What effect will that have on crops in Africa? How many more deaths through starvation will that create? How does stopping African useing their natural resources of oil and coal help them acchieve the same level of wealth and longevity we have in the west? You think these people are good? They only lack the intent to be seperated from the likes of Polpot.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
I take it that your parents died shortly after revealing that there was no Father Christmas?
Bob Emmett New Eugenicist - The weekly magazine for intelligent parenting. Published by the New World Order Press.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
You call that "discussing articulately?"
No, I call it articulate hatred, which I already stated here:
Ian Shlasko wrote:
the kind of hatred intelligent people are capable of discussing articulately.
although you chose to interpret what I wrote as 'articulate discussion'. Its amazing how easy it is to read what you want to read isnt it Ian?
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Anyone who doesn't agree with me is stupid and needs to die
Which isnt what I stated. What I did state was that dying, and therefore removing his personal carbon footprint fomr the earth, was the most honest thing he had done since 1) he is a self confessed liar, 2) he died while travalling on a massive CO2 producing machine, AKA an aeroplane. Just how many airmiles do you rekon he clocked up? I wonder just what sort of lifestyle he really led? Like al Gores 16 bedroom mansion with its $35,000 a year electric bill? Do you think he actually really gave a good god damn about CO2? DO you know that at thr Bali AGW conference they had to fly the planes empty form Bali to other islands because there wasnt enough space to keep them all there? Do you know that for the Copenhagen conference they had to bring limosines in from Switzerland and Austria because there werent enough in Denmark? And thse are the people telling us CO2 must be limited while continuing to produce it themselves with impunity? Its a case of 'do as I say not as I do'. If that doesnt stick in your throat then I pity you. I dont have aproblem with these people being alive, I have a problem with hypocrisy, fraud, and lies. Now if thats not articulately expressed hatred then I am sorry, the English language obviously isnt good enough for you. If so I also articulate my hatred for these charlatans in French, but I doubt it will mean anything to you.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Its a case of 'do as I say not as I do'. If that doesnt stick in your throat then I pity you. I dont have aproblem with these people being alive, I have a problem with hypocrisy, fraud, and lies.
And thus attack their corpse with the tact and consideration generally seen in demented badgers with slight anger issues. Being alarmist about the alarmists accomplishes jack squat.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
You call that "discussing articulately?"
No, I call it articulate hatred, which I already stated here:
Ian Shlasko wrote:
the kind of hatred intelligent people are capable of discussing articulately.
although you chose to interpret what I wrote as 'articulate discussion'. Its amazing how easy it is to read what you want to read isnt it Ian?
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Anyone who doesn't agree with me is stupid and needs to die
Which isnt what I stated. What I did state was that dying, and therefore removing his personal carbon footprint fomr the earth, was the most honest thing he had done since 1) he is a self confessed liar, 2) he died while travalling on a massive CO2 producing machine, AKA an aeroplane. Just how many airmiles do you rekon he clocked up? I wonder just what sort of lifestyle he really led? Like al Gores 16 bedroom mansion with its $35,000 a year electric bill? Do you think he actually really gave a good god damn about CO2? DO you know that at thr Bali AGW conference they had to fly the planes empty form Bali to other islands because there wasnt enough space to keep them all there? Do you know that for the Copenhagen conference they had to bring limosines in from Switzerland and Austria because there werent enough in Denmark? And thse are the people telling us CO2 must be limited while continuing to produce it themselves with impunity? Its a case of 'do as I say not as I do'. If that doesnt stick in your throat then I pity you. I dont have aproblem with these people being alive, I have a problem with hypocrisy, fraud, and lies. Now if thats not articulately expressed hatred then I am sorry, the English language obviously isnt good enough for you. If so I also articulate my hatred for these charlatans in French, but I doubt it will mean anything to you.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Which isnt what I stated. What I did state was that dying, and therefore removing his personal carbon footprint fomr the earth, was the most honest thing he had done since 1) he is a self confessed liar, 2) he died while travalling on a massive CO2 producing machine, AKA an aeroplane.
What was he supposed to do? Swim there? I bet if he did, you'd be complaining about his personal methane emissions instead.
fat_boy wrote:
Just how many airmiles do you rekon he clocked up? I wonder just what sort of lifestyle he really led? Like al Gores 16 bedroom mansion with its $35,000 a year electric bill?
Reality check: If you want to get a point across, the best way to do that is to actually GO places and TALK to people. Videoconferencing doesn't have nearly the same effect. Airplanes are the fastest way to get from point A to point B, when A and B are a significant distance apart. As for his lifestyle, why don't you actually figure out the answer, instead of just making mindless assumptions?
fat_boy wrote:
Do you think he actually really gave a good god damn about CO2?
Obviously you don't, and you think asking a rhetorical question constitutes some kind of proof.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
fat_boy wrote:
Which isnt what I stated. What I did state was that dying, and therefore removing his personal carbon footprint fomr the earth, was the most honest thing he had done since 1) he is a self confessed liar, 2) he died while travalling on a massive CO2 producing machine, AKA an aeroplane.
What was he supposed to do? Swim there? I bet if he did, you'd be complaining about his personal methane emissions instead.
fat_boy wrote:
Just how many airmiles do you rekon he clocked up? I wonder just what sort of lifestyle he really led? Like al Gores 16 bedroom mansion with its $35,000 a year electric bill?
Reality check: If you want to get a point across, the best way to do that is to actually GO places and TALK to people. Videoconferencing doesn't have nearly the same effect. Airplanes are the fastest way to get from point A to point B, when A and B are a significant distance apart. As for his lifestyle, why don't you actually figure out the answer, instead of just making mindless assumptions?
fat_boy wrote:
Do you think he actually really gave a good god damn about CO2?
Obviously you don't, and you think asking a rhetorical question constitutes some kind of proof.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
What was he supposed to do? Swim there? I bet if he did, you'd be complaining about his personal methane emissions instead.
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample. Mind you if its just another GW conference whats wrong with a tele conference?
Ian Shlasko wrote:
As for his lifestyle, why don't you actually figure out the answer, instead of just making mindless assumptions?
AH yeah, so of course Bali and Copenhagen actually acchieved alot did they? Well, actually they did for me. They pointed out what load of hypocritical tossers they are. Did you ever see the UN brochure about what the 15,000 delegates at Bali could get up to? I posted it on here. Jungle safaris, island hopping, all wondefull stuf. Funded by you and me, and producing tonnes of CO2. Sorry, What was that bleating I heard about lifestyle? And I can pretty much bet he has a car too. In fact I'll bet he has two. I bet he never cycled or used public transport, unless you call taxis public, whcih is quesitonable.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
Its a case of 'do as I say not as I do'. If that doesnt stick in your throat then I pity you. I dont have aproblem with these people being alive, I have a problem with hypocrisy, fraud, and lies.
And thus attack their corpse with the tact and consideration generally seen in demented badgers with slight anger issues. Being alarmist about the alarmists accomplishes jack squat.
-
Oh I dont know. I think I answered Ian pretty well:http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3539844/Re-One-less-GW-prick-to-fill-the-media-with-scare-.aspx[^]
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
I know what you were trying to say but try saying it with less joy: you can say whatever you like about the living (do I moan when you abuse me you miserable fucker?) but no fair when dead: they can't respond. Not, of course, that he was likely to but that ain't the point. Besides, nothing turns people off like a ranter and I know you say that you don't care what people think but you must or you wouldn't post in the first place. Calm down and you might get more converts: carry on as you are and you will end up as CSS2 (and I wouldn't wish that on anyone; even you).
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
A good man dies and this is your response?
Can't expect anything less from a half educated white trash dim wit...
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
Oh I dont know. I think I answered Ian pretty well:http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3539844/Re-One-less-GW-prick-to-fill-the-media-with-scare-.aspx[^]
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
And most of us think you didn't. So tell me, if your dad, spouse, etc were to die and you read someone spew force this sort of tirade, would you be happy? Insulting the dead is not a very good way to prove you are an "intellectual." It is a great way to show behavior akin to a 5 yr old bully. Try empathy sometime, I hear it does wonders for not making you look like a complete douchenozzle.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
What was he supposed to do? Swim there? I bet if he did, you'd be complaining about his personal methane emissions instead.
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample. Mind you if its just another GW conference whats wrong with a tele conference?
Ian Shlasko wrote:
As for his lifestyle, why don't you actually figure out the answer, instead of just making mindless assumptions?
AH yeah, so of course Bali and Copenhagen actually acchieved alot did they? Well, actually they did for me. They pointed out what load of hypocritical tossers they are. Did you ever see the UN brochure about what the 15,000 delegates at Bali could get up to? I posted it on here. Jungle safaris, island hopping, all wondefull stuf. Funded by you and me, and producing tonnes of CO2. Sorry, What was that bleating I heard about lifestyle? And I can pretty much bet he has a car too. In fact I'll bet he has two. I bet he never cycled or used public transport, unless you call taxis public, whcih is quesitonable.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample.
Why don't you look up the details, and find the difference in travel times for those particular points between airplane and train... Then figure out what his schedule was, and see whether traveling by rail was an option in that particular instance? Or are you just going to oversimplify things again?
fat_boy wrote:
Mind you if its just another GW conference whats wrong with a tele conference?
Because half the point is to get the message out to the public, and the media doesn't care about a bunch of guys sitting in front of computers at a hundred different locations.
fat_boy wrote:
AH yeah, so of course Bali and Copenhagen actually acchieved alot did they? Well, actually they did for me. They pointed out what load of hypocritical tossers they are. Did you ever see the UN brochure about what the 15,000 delegates at Bali could get up to? I posted it on here. Jungle safaris, island hopping, all wondefull stuf. Funded by you and me, and producing tonnes of CO2.
This is how international political gatherings work... All of them.
Sorry, What was that bleating I heard about lifestyle? And I can pretty much bet he has a car too. In fact I'll bet he has two. I bet he never cycled or used public transport, unless you call taxis public, whcih is quesitonable.
Oh no! He has a car! What an evil person! Is that the best you can do? First you compare him to Al Gore, who I think we all agree is just a useless attention hog, and now you're going to insult him for driving, something that almost everyone does? Yeah, let's insult the 65-year-old cancer survivor for not riding a bicycle... You really are out of ammo. You "bet" he never used public transport? Why don't you do some research and back that up, instead of just making ANOTHER assumption without bothering to check your facts? Hey, let's take this a step further... Why not just say something like, "I bet he molested children," just to insult him a little more? Would that make you feel special? Would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Autho -
Is this supposed to be relevant in anyway? If it is you are going to have to spell it out because I havent a clue what you mean.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Its not about my feelings, its about knowing what sort of person he was. Because you can bet the main media is going to go all gushy. Like this kind of crap: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/20/climate-change[^]
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Its not about my feelings, its about knowing what sort of person he was. Because you can bet the main media is going to go all gushy.
Don't give a damn about that. My complaint about you and this thread is your absolute willingness to desecrate this bloke almost before his body is cold. And that is bad form.
-
Stephen H. Schneider, climate change expert,alarmist dies at 65[^] "heart attack on an airplane en route to London from Stockholm" ah so we cant fly because it releases too much CO2 but its OK for him eh? Perhaps if the prick had taken his own alarmism seriously and got on his bike a bit he might still be alive? Anyway, lets look at what this twat has given us over the the years[^]: "A cooling trend has set in, perhaps one akin to the Little Ice Age." Ah yes, that was when it was cooling for 25 years. "Temperatures do not increase in proportion to an atmospheric increase in CO2" Yeah, while CO2 was going up. "“We’re betting the planet. There’s no such thing as a safe level [of CO2]. There’s a level of very risky, versus mildly risky." Ah yes, now its warming for 25 years CO2 is the big baddy. Of course its also a stupid statement since if CO2 drops much below 200 ppm life on the planet pretty much stops. SO any level above 200 ppm is automatically safe from one perspective at least. " I don't set very much store by looking at the direct evidence." We worked that out already. ""[We] have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."" Whether its warming or cooling eh, just keep up with the scary lies? More Schnider alarmist lies can be found at: http://www.john-daly.com/schneidr.htm[^] Well, good riddence asshole. You managed to commit fraud and get away with it. Now you are dead you at least have removed YOUR personal carbon foot print form the earth. Perhaps the only honest thing you have ever done! ;P :laugh: ;P :laugh: ;P
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
What was he supposed to do? Swim there? I bet if he did, you'd be complaining about his personal methane emissions instead.
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample. Mind you if its just another GW conference whats wrong with a tele conference?
Ian Shlasko wrote:
As for his lifestyle, why don't you actually figure out the answer, instead of just making mindless assumptions?
AH yeah, so of course Bali and Copenhagen actually acchieved alot did they? Well, actually they did for me. They pointed out what load of hypocritical tossers they are. Did you ever see the UN brochure about what the 15,000 delegates at Bali could get up to? I posted it on here. Jungle safaris, island hopping, all wondefull stuf. Funded by you and me, and producing tonnes of CO2. Sorry, What was that bleating I heard about lifestyle? And I can pretty much bet he has a car too. In fact I'll bet he has two. I bet he never cycled or used public transport, unless you call taxis public, whcih is quesitonable.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample.
Is that thermal efficiency? And for what type of train? I'd expect diesels to have different efficiencies to electrics. And when you calculate overall efficiency for an electric you have to take into account the efficiency of the generating plant and transmission losses. The last time I looked generating plants were less than 50% efficient (but it does depend on how they are fueled).
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
fat_boy wrote:
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample.
Why don't you look up the details, and find the difference in travel times for those particular points between airplane and train... Then figure out what his schedule was, and see whether traveling by rail was an option in that particular instance? Or are you just going to oversimplify things again?
fat_boy wrote:
Mind you if its just another GW conference whats wrong with a tele conference?
Because half the point is to get the message out to the public, and the media doesn't care about a bunch of guys sitting in front of computers at a hundred different locations.
fat_boy wrote:
AH yeah, so of course Bali and Copenhagen actually acchieved alot did they? Well, actually they did for me. They pointed out what load of hypocritical tossers they are. Did you ever see the UN brochure about what the 15,000 delegates at Bali could get up to? I posted it on here. Jungle safaris, island hopping, all wondefull stuf. Funded by you and me, and producing tonnes of CO2.
This is how international political gatherings work... All of them.
Sorry, What was that bleating I heard about lifestyle? And I can pretty much bet he has a car too. In fact I'll bet he has two. I bet he never cycled or used public transport, unless you call taxis public, whcih is quesitonable.
Oh no! He has a car! What an evil person! Is that the best you can do? First you compare him to Al Gore, who I think we all agree is just a useless attention hog, and now you're going to insult him for driving, something that almost everyone does? Yeah, let's insult the 65-year-old cancer survivor for not riding a bicycle... You really are out of ammo. You "bet" he never used public transport? Why don't you do some research and back that up, instead of just making ANOTHER assumption without bothering to check your facts? Hey, let's take this a step further... Why not just say something like, "I bet he molested children," just to insult him a little more? Would that make you feel special? Would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
AuthoIan Shlasko wrote:
Hey, let's take this a step further... Why not just say something like, "I bet he molested children," just to insult him a little more? Would that make you feel special? Would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Now you are just being silly.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
How about a train? They are about 90% efficient for axample.
Is that thermal efficiency? And for what type of train? I'd expect diesels to have different efficiencies to electrics. And when you calculate overall efficiency for an electric you have to take into account the efficiency of the generating plant and transmission losses. The last time I looked generating plants were less than 50% efficient (but it does depend on how they are fueled).
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
riced wrote:
Is that thermal efficiency? And for what type of train?
No, its its mechanical efficiency. Diesels are about 45%, petrol engines about 40%. Steam engines by the way are abot 12%. If the electric motor is used for braking too then the efficiancy of an electric motor can be further improved overall.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
Its not about my feelings, its about knowing what sort of person he was. Because you can bet the main media is going to go all gushy.
Don't give a damn about that. My complaint about you and this thread is your absolute willingness to desecrate this bloke almost before his body is cold. And that is bad form.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
And that is bad form.
It's perfectly normal to be glad about a bad person's death. He was a rotten apple, and now he is going to the landfill.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
And that is bad form.
It's perfectly normal to be glad about a bad person's death. He was a rotten apple, and now he is going to the landfill.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
He was a rotten apple
...says our rotten apple.
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." (DNA)
-
Can't expect anything less from a half educated white trash dim wit...
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit