Re: Global Warming Alert

On 8/16/2026 12:37 PM, dart200 wrote:
> On 8/16/26 12:25 PM, Wilson wrote:
>> On 8/16/2026 3:13 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 8/16/26 11:58 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2026 2:41 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/26 11:01 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2026 1:29 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/26 6:54 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2026 4:26 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/26 11:46 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2026 1:03 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2026 12:39:24 -0400, Wilson 
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't count the number of times you've called me a liar. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> And near as I can tell it's only because:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. I've been wrong about something.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. You don't agree with me.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try asshole.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No one cares when you say that, Noah. It does not make you 
>>>>>>>>>> look tougher.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Neither of those two things are a lie. And I can absolutely 
>>>>>>>>>>>> state that I've never deliberately lied on this ng or any 
>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>>>>>> lies are not opinions or ideas, or notions, or guesses, or 
>>>>>>>>>>> innocent.
>>>>>>>>>>> lies are deliberate, you might not know when you are reciting
>>>>>>>>>>> propaganda, but you should, you are smart enough to know 
>>>>>>>>>>> better, but
>>>>>>>>>>> you do not.  I am not inclined to be forgiving.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Even if love says you are limited by your ideological 
>>>>>>>>>>> commitments. You
>>>>>>>>>>> are still smart enough to know better.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sitting up there on your throne of beliefs, surveying and 
>>>>>>>>>> passing judgement on the benighted plebs that surround you.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If I'm reciting propaganda but am not smart enough to know 
>>>>>>>>>> better, that's not lying. And if it's a case of not being 
>>>>>>>>>> smart enough, it can't be deliberate.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> nah, when ur deliberately cherry-picking when to accept 
>>>>>>>>> evidence vs reject it based on trying to fit that evidence to 
>>>>>>>>> ur preferred narrative ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Using discernment to see what seems to fit reality best, 
>>>>>>>> deciding what makes sense.  Versus swallowing whole everything 
>>>>>>>> told to you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> my dumbass retarded nigga, ur doing it with _with the same body 
>>>>>>> of evidence_ ... ei magically accepting it when the evidence 
>>>>>>> suits ur stupefyingly denialist narrative, and rejecting it when 
>>>>>>> it doesn't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah I can see how that's confusing for you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it's not confusing, ur just willfully lying because due to 
>>>>>>> refusing to take responsibility for the godshit u preach
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're always free to refute what I say with actual facts, rather 
>>>>>> than regurgitating the regime narrative bolstered by your usual 
>>>>>> insults & semi-delusional rants.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> you haven't even bothered to refute the paleoclimatic facts yet u 
>>>>> dumbass. if they are wrong, there should be some reason to not 
>>>>> believe than, and such reason has not been provided ...
>>>>>
>>>>> ofc we both know u don't even remotely have the technical skill to 
>>>>> do that. the gptslop you dumped out in lieu of actual ability was 
>>>>> disgustingly pathetic
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You called some of the papers I did cite bogus, and couldn't even 
>>>> follow the logic of why I interpreted one the way I did. As it's 
>>>> apparently beyond you, why should I bother?
>>>>
>>>
>>> u can't even cite the papers correct u dumbass
>>>
>>> u literally tried to pass off a simulation attemp that the paper 
>>> itself stated as obviously incomplete... as an actual hard 
>>> paleoclimatic reconstruction
>>>
>>> u don't even know what evidence even is ur so damn negligently caught 
>>> up in ideological bullcrap
>>>
>>
>> Nick: "blah, blah, blah, everyone who's not me is stupid..."
>>
> 
> i nowhere tried to utilize that kind of argument, i specifically 
> detailed how you were full of shit wilson. 
 >
That's a wrap. Good work. You wrapped up the Global Warming discussion. 
Brilliant!
 >
u unfortunately are not
> capable of recognizing evdience
> 
It is impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on you: 
global warming. Go!

Note:

The person making a claim about a hidden or new thing carries the duty 
to show it, rather than forcing others to chase an infinite shadow.