felipejoys

oh I have huniepop. I stopped playing it because it made me want to try being courteous to girls by giving them gifts. I was so silly. gamification of something based on the live world can really mess

but are only interested in derogation of my character. you know what? I agree with you. it is very derogatory. it sucks that this was the conclusion I came to. I wish it was different. but it is what it

Stop putting words in my mouth I was explaining how I see you based on what you've demonstrated. you're saying you don't agree with it. that's fine. "...if you believe that climate change is real,

proved NASA wrong using an older paper instead of something fresh doesn't prove them wrong I feel you're acting in bad faith. I feel like, for as long as I don't comply, you'll place me as either too dumb

I'm here partially to try to enlighten to both you and I well, actually, I like when good logic is used and I'm annoyed when bad logic is used. I saw bad logic in your post so I chased it. this is my actual

mangled grammar to impugn merit if you mean literal grammar of the english language, I'm doing my best. if you don't then nvm

oh okay... :( ps: I'm aware of that kanji and it's pretty funny under dark humor. and I actually thought of that kanji myself while writing it and chuckled. I did make sure to say that men are talkative

Other than that I didn't mention my financial interest at all. your reply here has mentioned it, so I included it. If you're only here to attack me personally I'm here partially to try to enlighten to

NASA is one of the leading AGW propaganda institutions. However, the numbers you are citing above are vastly different than those published by Lindzen and Happer. Lindzen and Happer say that water vapor

an excerpt from one of my other comments: Nasa says CO2 represents 20% alone, while clouds and water vapor represent 75% combined. Because CO2 traps heat, there's more heat, which means more water vapor,

I also think that this % thing is sabotaging you. Let's say there's this space that holds 1000 people and is filled with 70 talkative men and 30 talkative women. 30% of the population is female. 100% of

I'd pick the one where the $275T didn't go to scammers, but instead ended up in the hands of folks seizing the means of production with it to create the blessings of civilization themselves, and cutting

this is too convoluted for me. can we try this? first, I want to talk about how the paper characterizes CO2 as a weak GHG. can we talk about that without bringing other stuff up? if you say "you can't

okay, so I'm looking at the study, and boy does it bring me anguish reading it At today's CO2 concentration in the atmosphere of approximately 425 parts per million,additional amounts of CO2 have little

so you're saying you are aligned with the idea that "climate change by humans is fake" because "humans don't have the means to affect climate". okay. and you're saying you believe opposing

I want to get to know you and understand why you're aligned with the idea that "climate change is fake" which do you prefer in your own financial and political interests - that climate change

Professors Emeritus pointing out demonstrable facts. Actual scientific method in action. I need an answer I can use to neutralize studies that point to the opposite. You have been told that happened by

so if it's not global warming, I am left wondering what exactly is responsible for my city's average temperature rising by 10 degrees in the summer over the last 20 years, and why it is such a commonplace

eu quase não bebo álcool e ainda assim invejei essa refeição

I'm glad you could bring them some of the things you didn't get to experience