A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What - Intelligent Thought?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 12th 07, 02:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Richard Cheese
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

Joe Cipale? As if that's your real name. What a dumbass! While your at
it, why not give full disclosure of all your personal information dumbass
including your social security number, credit card number, expiration date,
PIN, and mother's maiden name.


"Joe Cipale" wrote in message
...

I do not give a damn what you people say about this post......
It means nothing to my life


I love worthless, cowardly POS trolls who dont have the courage to post a
REAL email address in their electronic flatulation. Makes it sooooo much
easier to place them in the electronic waste basket of stupdidity where
they belong. At least kunuch has the cajones to use a real email address.



Ads
  #22  
Old February 12th 07, 02:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Richard Cheese
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

This means you are a dumbass!


"Joe Cipale" wrote in message
...


Wind energy is a domestic source of energy, produced in the United
States. The nation's wind supply is abundant.


Especially when Congress is in session...



  #23  
Old February 12th 07, 02:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Curtis L. Russell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:31:25 GMT, "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com
wrote:

That's because you don't understand the issues. And I'm tired of explaining
it to you since you don't really want to know anything about it. You only
want to pretend that the USA is composed of evil people who should be
stopped at everything they're doing. You seem to prefer those nice honest Al
Qaida members.


And you appear to believe that everyone in the USA is incapable of
doing anything that rises above their own self-interest. Frankly, I've
never known anyone with such a constant low opinion of US citizens in
particular and the human race in general.

I'm starting to think that the reason you hold us liberals in such low
esteem is that some of them were on a sidewalk on their own time once,
protesting for a cause other than their own self-interest, and they
slowed you down for a second or two - no doubt enough reason to hold a
grudge for a lifetime.

At least be consistent. If your issue that nothing is needed to be
done and nothing is really all that wrong, don't quote an article
that, in fact, proposes action. If it ain't people, then the people
can keep right on keeping on, just as they are. I happen to disagree,
especially if the concern is that we will only have two TVs in every
house rather than three. I think our economy will adapt to all that
un-American conservatism.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
  #24  
Old February 12th 07, 03:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Curtis L. Russell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

On 11 Feb 2007 23:14:25 -0800, "
wrote:

it however does not say that "trying to hold down CO2 emission would
end up costing millions or even billions of lives". that part is
invented by you.


If TK had ever shown the inclination towards hyperbole, I could mark
it down to that. But every time I made that assumption in the past, he
ended up being dead serious (and defending the hyperbole for days if
not weeks, maybe years). I guess that he expects to hear sometime in
the future a broadcast along the lines of, "Today the loss in lives
due to CO2 emissions reduction passed the 900 million mark, but the
U.N and its U.S. liberal lackeys have vowed to hold the course..."

I think a Chung chart showing worst case intersection between "lost
lives" and and resulting reduced CO2 emissions from just the reduction
in population alone would be useful. With luck, we can go back to our
former ways when only 400 or 500 million are dead. We liberals are an
optimistic lot.

Curtis L. Russell
Practicing liberal asshole...
  #25  
Old February 12th 07, 03:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,322
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

On Feb 11, 10:41 pm, "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com wrote:
At the basis of the global warming hysteria (snip)


Hysteria??? Hysteria???

Here's *your* hysteria right he

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbcctWbC8Q0

--D-y

  #26  
Old February 12th 07, 03:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Paul Cassel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 264
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

Tom Kunich wrote:
At the basis of the global warming hysteria is the idea that man is causing
it and that therefore man is evil.


No. The basis of the concern is that the contribution man makes is
accelerating the warming. Nobody thinks that man alone is the sole cause
of this.

-paul
  #27  
Old February 12th 07, 03:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Vidmar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

Dude, I expect it won't be long before we read about your exploits with an
attack rifle from a bell tower somewhere. Seriously, you are in need of
major psychiatric assistance. Hopefully, one of your friends or loved ones
will help you get the help that you need.


"Tom Kunich" [email protected] com wrote in message
k.net...
At the basis of the global warming hysteria is the idea that man is
causing it and that therefore man is evil. The fact that trying to hold
down CO2 emissions would end up costing millions if not billions of lives
just doesn't seem to register on the do-gooders who are convinced that all
we have to do is turn the therostat down to 68 and we'll all be fine.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0207171745.htm

"The science policy experts, writing in the Feb. 8, 2007 issue of Nature,
say adapting to the changing climate by building resilient societies and
fostering sustainable development would go further in securing a future
for humans on a warming planet than just cutting gas emissions."

""To define adaptation as the cost of failed mitigation is to expose
millions of poor people in compromised ecosystems to the very dangers that
climate policy seeks to avoid," the authors state. "By contrast, defining
adaptation in terms of sustainable development, would allow a focus both
on reducing emissions and on the vulnerability of populations to climate
variability and change, rather than tinkering at the margins of both
emissions and impacts."

Nahh, I'm pretty sure that the Liberals would much rather just kill off
2/3rds of the world's population. That way their homes in the Marin
Redwoods would remain unchanged.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #28  
Old February 12th 07, 04:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Jim Flom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 242
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

"Tom Kunich" [email protected] com wrote in message
k.net...
At the basis of the global warming hysteria is the idea that man is
causing


Caught your limit on that one, Tom.


  #29  
Old February 12th 07, 05:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Tom Kunich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,456
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

"Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Feb 11, 10:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com wrote:

Would you rather pay American engineers from General Electric to build
windfarms or pay Saudi Arabian princes $70/barrel for oil?


In the 1930's the Morgan Company built the world's biggest wind
generator.
Until a decade ago it was the largest on record. It was also as efficient
as
the most modern one's today.


Dude, you're an idiot. 1930's tech=2000 tech?


No, I'm an engineer - what was it you said you do for a living again? Oh,
that's right - you're an inheritance baby.

That's like saying the propellor of a 1930s plane moves air as
efficiently as a modern jet turbine (the same fluid dynamics advances
apply to both turbines that move air and turbines that are moved by
air).


You really don't have a clue do you? Maybe you'd like to explain why most
of the early aerodynamic sections in the design book were put there by the
Wright brothers? Wait, - obviously because they were stupid and today's air
is a lot different from that of 1905.

Here's a clue Henry - if you don't understand what you're talking about
perhaps you ought to study the subject beyond a wikipedia entry.


  #30  
Old February 12th 07, 05:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Curtis L. Russell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default What - Intelligent Thought?

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:12:23 GMT, "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com
wrote:


Here's a clue Henry - if you don't understand what you're talking about
perhaps you ought to study the subject beyond a wikipedia entry.


I guess that's why an article in today's online WSJ says that
wind-driven turbines (and geothermal generation) are both close to
being economically viable even without subsidies and that with
economies of larger scale production of the turbines and a reduction
in the current financing penalty paid on both, they both may be viable
in the near future - without subsidies.

Ten barrels to make one - who did our math? Kind of reminds me of the
new ESPN commercial, the 'talking out of your ass' one.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anybody care to say something intelligent about Landis' web defense ? [email protected] Racing 21 October 14th 06 02:15 PM
[totally OT] NYT Article about Intelligent Design Ernst Noch Racing 63 September 1st 05 06:25 PM
Intelligent comment Mikefule Unicycling 25 July 21st 05 03:05 AM
more intelligent computers Miles General 7 December 8th 04 01:52 AM
The Neanderthals: More Intelligent than Mountain Bikers! Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 7 September 30th 03 04:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.