How do you debate people with fully addled brains?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Apparently People Like Warm Weather
- 100% Wind By 2030
- It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Climate Grifting Shutting Down
- Fundamental Pillars Of Democracy
- An Inconvenient Truth
- Antarctic Meltdown Update
- “Trump eyes major cuts to NOAA research”
- Data Made Simple II – Sneak Preview
- Attacks On Democracy
- Scientists Warn
- Upping The Ante
- Our New Leadership
- Grok Defines Fake News
- Arctic Meltdown Update
- The Savior Of Humanity
- President Trump Explains The Stock Market
- Net Zero In Europe
- The Canadian Hockey Stick
- Dogs Cause Hurricanes, Tornadoes And Droughts
- 50 Years Of Climate Devastation
- Climate Cycles
- Hiding The Decline
- Careful Research At BBC News
- New Video : Man Made Climate Emergency
Recent Comments
- Caleb Shaw on An Inconvenient Truth
- arn on Apparently People Like Warm Weather
- Francis Barnett on 100% Wind By 2030
- conrad ziefle on 100% Wind By 2030
- mwhite on 100% Wind By 2030
- dearieme on 100% Wind By 2030
- DABA13 on 100% Wind By 2030
- Gamecock on 100% Wind By 2030
- gordon vigurs on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on 100% Wind By 2030
Good gravy.
“How do you debate people with fully addled brains?”
By inhaling a similar quantity of medication.
“The point”
\
/
\
/
\
[williamch’s head]
“To be charitable, maybe stevengoddard is pointing out that people have been saying that the sky is falling for a long time. I learned about it in secondary school, it was called science fiction”
Another science settler found his Goldilocks Zone.
More than a century ago it was demonstrated that the mythical “greenhouse effect” does not work on greenhouses. There has never been any evidence that it works on planets either. Teaching silly nonsense to school students is another reason that children would be better off and have learned more if th schools were just burned down.
He is not addled. Deluded, but not addled. He is a Leftist with a hate on for critics of the “consensus”, because that is his gang and their dogma, and he only “debates” to spout derogatory comments about the “foe” (that’s you, in this case, Steven). The only way you can win a “debate” with him is if the “debate” is set up as a very hard contact sport (with maybe an octagon around it…you know), where he doesn’t get to judge when or if you score a definitive hit on him, but must suffer the hit as a hard fact, immediately and intimately. Debating on the internet is like using a waterwheel to power your bicycle–in a word, ineffective (in two words: obviously ineffective).