The true believers .is there anyone who thought that was anything but theatre?
On public transport, in an environmentally friendly manner!!!Head for the hills .
as funny as following it blindly after it tries to kill grandma with a virus, I suppose.Y'know, talking about how useless science is on the internet is pretty funny, actually.
What do you use, instead? "Common sense," I suppose?as funny as following it blindly after it tries to kill grandma with a virus, I suppose.
OK, the impertinent little girl won't hurt you, I promise.regardless, an impertinent little girl does not a scientist make.
in recognizing what is conjecture and not blindly following it? yes!What do you use, instead? "Common sense," I suppose?
Bark and steel is all you need, Merc. None o' these fancy-Dan doctors and suchlike. Why I hear now some gol-dang librul yewniversity types up there in the Canadian Soviet Socialist Republic are trying to get folk to take thet that "in-soo-lin" stuff.in recognizing what is conjecture and not blindly following it? yes!
And as in the past 40+ years nothing close to what they say will happen, happened. It's all about the money folks!!In only 2 days the world will end tragically.
Only June 21 2018 Greta said we have 5 years.
View attachment 18519
Well here we are....
Almost as funny as someone who doesn't know the difference between actual science and highly politicized advocacy "science". Should we start with the fake 97% consensus and work from there? Or should we start further back in the past and work from there?Y'know, talking about how useless science is on the internet is pretty funny, actually.
Just A top climate scientist? I mean if this was a real concern you'd think more than just one "top climate scientist" would have chimed in.In only 2 days the world will end tragically.
Only June 21 2018 Greta said we have 5 years.
View attachment 18519
Well here we are....
You should start wherever you like and work your way north.Almost as funny as someone who doesn't know the difference between actual science and highly politicized advocacy "science". Should we start with the fake 97% consensus and work from there? Or should we start further back in the past and work from there?