If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

[Co2sceptic]

Unless I have missed the last entry by Q I get the feeling he has gone, do I remove ALL of his post or let them remain.

Please let me know Q

No, second thoughts, Q, just drop in and let us know if you have had enough or just got fed up.

We would ALL be interested in your current view, has it changed for the better or worse?

NB Your articles shall remain unless you want them removed.

[Gropes]

Unless I have messed the last entry by Q I get the feeling he has gone, now do I remove ALL of his post or let it remain.

Please let me know Q

Na, I wouldn't bother removing his posts. You lot might just learn some science if you ever read them.

[Co2sceptic]

Nice of you to pick this up, what do you make of the latest report on AmazonGate?

[Gropes]

Sorry, I don't bother with frivolousgates. Like most people, I prefer to look at the big picture instead of jumping up and down bashing scientists over 3 words in an email or a typo in a 3000 page document.

[Climate Realist]

Unless I have messed the last entry by Q I get the feeling he has gone, now do I remove ALL of his post or let it remain.

Please let me know Q

Na, I wouldn't bother removing his posts. You lot might just learn some science if you ever read them.

That is the funniest thing I have read on this forum!

Grouper, you should take your own advice and read the articles on this site and WUWT and the posters here (except Q) for the TRUTH on climate change.

CO2 sceptic- leave Q's posts, he has proved time and time again by losing every weak argument of his that the CAGW case has not a shred of truth in it.

[Mike Davis]

I think Q and Groupie are the best support that we have. All one has to do is read what they wrote to realize the weakness in their arguments.

Groupie has just provided us with HUMOR and evidence of his not understanding science.

Please Groupie tell us more about your version or reality.

[Gropes]

:D

That is the funniest thing I have read on this forum!

Grouper, you should take your own advice and read the articles on this site and WUWT and the posters here (except Q) for the TRUTH on climate change.

CO2 sceptic- leave Q's posts, he has proved time and time again by losing every weak argument of his that the CAGW case has not a shred of truth in it.

Hey CR, why don't you stop avoiding my questions and answer them on this thread or do we have to read your dumbass soundbites?

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=546

[Mike Davis]

Groupie:
All the answers about Monckton you are looking for:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/image ... braham.pdf
This is the condensed version.
But if you are really interested in what Monckton thinks about what has been falsely stated about him:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress. ... ra-qq2.pdf

Keep in mind that you are on a web site based in Great Britain and what you say about someone can be taken as an attempt to falsely damage his reputation.

[Climate Realist]

:D


"Hey CR, why don't you stop avoiding my questions and answer them on this thread or do we have to read your dumbass soundbites?
"

What questions?? You have asked no questions on this thread! As for soundbites, that is all the CAGW side has, as well as lies. If you look at the data, it shows that climate change is overwhelmingly natural in causation.

[Gropes]

:D


"Hey CR, why don't you stop avoiding my questions and answer them on this thread or do we have to read your dumbass soundbites?
"

What questions?? You have asked no questions on this thread! As for soundbites, that is all the CAGW side has, as well as lies. If you look at the data, it shows that climate change is overwhelmingly natural in causation.

Hmm, it appears you are as stupid as your posts? Do you not know how to click on a link? How come none of you chaps can explain why did Lord Monckton deliberately confuse surface area and volume to make his case for Arctic cooling? But hey, the only thing you lot know what to do is to confuse science and bash scientists. A bit like Lord Monckton really...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=546

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=439