THE Climate Sceptics Party of Australia have been actively generating enough members to be able to register as a political party to contest elections in Australia. With the considerable efforts of President Leon Ashby, Anthony Cox and others we are fast approaching the required 500 members. As of today we need 26 more.
Upon gaining the 500 members we will immediately apply for registration as a political party. This will entitle us to have our name on the ballot paper beside our candidates. In senate elections we will be able to offer above the line voting and direct our preferences as we see fit. Another bonus will be for every vote we can attract, the Government will pay us in the vicinity of $2 per vote subsidy to fund our political activities.
During discussions from the last couple of days it is the intention if we gain party status in time to run a candidate in the upcoming Bradfield by-election for the seat vacated by Brendon Nelson. At last an opportunity to try some of the strategies discussed at a membership level and to take up the fight to the major parties.
I would like to thank those of you who have helped us get where we are whether that has been advice, speaking at events or in fact joining as a member.
I would like to ask that if any of you know of other potential members that could join ASAP or perhaps like to do so yourself that would be very much appreciated.
Thank you
Michael Rowley
Member of TCS executive.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Improvement in standards of living throughout history have arisen mainly from new technology.
If science is politicised, progress will be affected, with the poor suffering more than the rich.
The Climate Sceptics oppose the politicisation of climate science, where left-wing political activists, supported by a large number of vested interests, have hijacked a minor scientific hypothesis and viciously attacked anyone who dares questions their beliefs.
If you care about people you must care about the future of science, so support the Climate Sceptics at http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/
Can all the boys and girls at Lukedesk and SJT-desk help?
And do we get individual guns? Like it’s not like we’re mental or anything.
But it’s sad really – you’ll be now taking the few 100 desperates that voted for Birdy. Could he go extinct?
Luke
of course you get a gun as judging from your posts all you fire is blanks.
Ah, the night soil division has arrived. Luke, you are supposed to do your work in an appropriate manner, and keep the noise levels down so as not to disturb your fellow persons. I don’t suppose you would remember them, but last century night soil was collected by “green” dunny trucks during the wee hours of the morning, before we evil capitalists engineered metal pipes through which to excavate human excrement to places of appropriateness for the degrading of human biorefuse.
If you and your fellow Fabians (Socialists who are liars) get their way with the ETS legislation, here and in the US, start getting used to the noise of the dunny cart collectors son, because in your case, they would need a daily semi-trailer to cart yours every morning.
If a double disolution election is called and held next Easter, how prepared is the party to do battle with a hostile media?
Would the CSP allow candidates to run in every seat except where the Nationals hold sway?
Will the Nats get CSP preferences?
If the Sceptics ran in city seats, driving home the Nats argument that AGW is a crock, they would be doing us all a great service.
Barnaby for PM!
Sinkers – that’s pretty funny from a guy with a gravatar of a dunny fly.
But moving right along now that RV has called Plimer’s bluff by answering his own smokescreen questions (presumably posed only so he can duck Monbiot’s simpler questions) http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/08/plimers_bluff_called.php do you think Monbiot should hang around his mailbox waiting for Plimer’s reponse?
And will the sceptics party have a question and answer blog itself where they take serious questions. Or will it be a closely stage managed affair?
Nothing for you to see here Luke. Move on!!!!
But keep a look out. The AGW crash is just around the corner and coming to a ballot box near you. Don’t you just love democracy.
Oh!!! wait a minute. Or are you one of the true believers that says democracy might have to go ” For the Good of the Planet”.
Nice one Louis but don’t worry about the ETS and Copenhagen too much. The wheels have come off the night soil division’s cart and the zombies are just going through the motions.
Luke – “And will the sceptics party have a question and answer blog itself where they take serious questions. Or will it be a closely stage managed affair?
what’s this, an Obamaquote?
Luke
To quote James Hanson:
“The overwhelming practical requirement, for the sake of future generations, humanity itself, and the other species on the planet, is phase-out of coal emissions over the next 20 year.”
Will this happen under the current world order? That’s a big NO.
It is obvious that coal emissions will just keep increasing as most governments are operating on the NATO principle.
James Hanson has a plan you need to embrace – civil resistance.
WHY spend these vital decades in futile exchanges with your intellectual superiors? Would it not be better to join with like minded friends form a civil resistance cadre as recommended by Saint James and fight to save world you hold so dear?After all you fail dismally as a representative of the AGW intelligentsia.
, but
Now now Michael – the last thing a sceptics party will represent is democracy. For example you’re already outvoted on the science, reality and popular numbers and just won’t lie down. Secondly check out your fellow travellers. Ah yes – the unrepresentative swilliness of minor parties.
SJT – have you joined yet? How’d your request go?
Alan – Who’s James Hanson ? You guys are so well researched.
“civil resistance cadre” – sounds like the sceptic party itself.
Golly (being pure evil etc) wouldn’t it be dreadful if it was stinking hot summer and and an EL Nino – or even “better” stinking hot with drought and no El Nino. Just musing.
I guess you can fan each other with the placards….
Hey Luke. I have read so many of your posts on this site. You really are not a very nice person are you.
Do you have to work at it or does it just come naturally?
Luke is this site’s biggest fan, he must boost the site’s stats a huge extent. He obviously has a lot of time on his hands, must be a civil servant or laid off schoolmaster.
Luke,
Outvoted on the science? Since when was science based on consensus? AGW might be, plate tectonics and evolution might be, but then those are pseudosciences maintained by belief, not from the compulsion of empirical fact. Strange that’s it’s the political left driving the AGW bandwagon – lefty lemmings seems an apt summary.
Michael, don’t worry about luke, it’s just his way of showing he cares; actually I’m still waiting for his response to the points I made way back here;
http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/03/introducting-the-climate-sceptics-a-new-political-party/
Dear Michael – well my manners have been created from dealing with sceptics. You should examine your own side’s modus operandi. You simply don’t like hearing the alternative argument at the same thrust (except at 180 degrees). In general most sceptics aren’t very nice people either.
But yes – I do have to work at it
It’s not the scepticism that is so much of a worry – moreover the nasty political eccentricity that comes with it. Plus it’s anti-capitalist and anti-innovation at heart.
Well Sinkers – I know you think everyone can “have a go” – but you then end up with McLean et al don’t you? And I have yet to see you ever put up any science on anything. Tell us Sinkers – how do you work with multiple system drivers and your little pot of “empirical data”.
Coho’s back to building heat again – Jack’s beanstalk. Coho – trawling through the literature with a stapler adding things here and there doesn’t build a philosophical position.
Luke…the latest from BOM, El Nino’s dead in the water so the Warmists won’t get their temp spike this year.
Nevertheless, the Trade Winds have stalled so perhaps you should be praying to Gaia (in hope and faith) that the SST warm up a bit.
A double dissolution election around Easter, a blank sun, cold PDO and ‘still born’ El Nino should see your side of politics routed.
Keep bashing away at it Luke. It just makes our job easier. Sometime you should really sit down and have a long look at what you write. When the veil falls from your eyes you will see that you are the best thing going for us.
Being the helpful person I am, I’ll give you a clue. Your arguments and others like yourself are nearly always directed at either sliming , attempts to ridicule and basically wanting us to shut up and go away. Sceptics on the other hand want to hear from everybody because it is the basis of making an informed judgement of the merits or otherwise of a particular view of anything. In other words, your little petty statements about the character of sceptics are arrogant and loathsome.
As I don’t know you personally all I can judge your character on is on the basis of what you write. But I’ll tell you this for what it is worth. Nobody from any side of this issue has convinced me they know how the climate system works. The day if and when sometime someone can forcast the weather, seasonal outlook, climate accurately every day, day in day out I’ll believe them.
Scepticism is a duty, and the foundation of democracy. It gives you the freedom to admit your wrong. To change your opinion when the facts change. You sir are tied to your worn out dogma. Your duty to stifle debate. To tow the alarmist line. To look down from on high with your feelings of superiority. Keep shouting to the world your mantra. Feel happy that you are helping us no end.
Keep up the good work!!!!
Michael
I noticed Agmates gives the Sceptics their support. This is a good move and a bond with the Nats, if they should divorce the Libs over the ETS, will see you well placed to form a coalition with like minded individuals.
Your lot running in the cities would be a perfect compliment, as the Nats expand their power-base in the bush.
A word of advice to Michael. When you apply for registration the AEC will check your membership list and some of the names will not be accepted (some people inevitably get their details wrong). Consequently, it is generally a good idea to make sure you have well more than the necessary 500 before you apply.
Also, you only get $2 per vote if you get over 4% of the vote, which is quite difficult for a micro-party. And if you haven’t applied yet, then it’s almost impossible that you’ll be registered in time for the Bradfield by-election.
To that end, I should mention that the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is already registered, has over 2000 members, and we plan to have a candidate at the Bradfield by-election. The LDP has consistently opposed an emissions trading system. More details at:
http://ldp.org.au/federal/policies/energy.html
It might make sense for somebody from the Sceptics party to get in touch with LDP President (Peter Whelan) and/or Treasurer (David Leyonhjelm) to see if there are some prospects for working together.
John Humphreys
as a founding member of this nascent political party, this very issue of checking credentials was uppermost in deliberations.
Your suggestions for linking with the ldp are also of interest but from my own experience, both as a former Liberal Party branch member and office bearer, and an unrepentant Rothbardian, I don’t think it will pan out. I could be wrong, of course, usually am.
OK Michael Rowley
“Scepticism is a duty, and the foundation of democracy.” And so you get the skittish behaviour you deserve. But faux scepticism is really just spoiling isn’t it. And what you mainly have on here is faux scepticism. Bunk pretend scepticism.
Do I expect to convince you of anything – nope. Well maybe one thing – climate expressed through weather and longer term patterns can be adverse to humans and ecosystems stable for long periods of time. Especially when humans are interacting further with those systems.
So we are episodically pounded by drought, floods, heatwaves, cold outbreaks and hurricanes. Is the current climate or climate of the last few hundred years benign and kindly at all times.
In Australia we’ve come off an exceptional circumstances strategy for relief of drought costing billions and billions now over decades. Indeed – now even bizarrely – for extreme “non-drought”
“Queensland’s Gulf of Carpentaria region is applying to become the country’s first to receive Exceptional Circumstances (EC) help because of floods.
The Northern Gulf Resource Management group, which is making the application, says a declaration would enable graziers devastated by floods earlier this year to get interest subsidies and income support.
She says some Gulf properties lost 50 per cent of their stock and the floods destroyed about 800,000 hectares of grassland, and the submission for EC funding has a reasonable chance of success.”
So faced with what I think is a 70-80% “for”argument on AGW – what’s your risk strategy? What if you are wrong?
And as a a member of the TCS executive what would you suggest from your extensive reading would be the major insight into Australian climate in the last year. Does that finding trouble you?
And you will have to make decisions on climate issues – such as allocation of water in the MDB – what’s your basis given you don’t believe in any of the science.
But really the TCS appear a bunch of immature ideologues who are focussed on a single issue of killing off an ETS and like measures. But also and reprehensibly – trashing the national climate science effort – and if you’re getting your “alternative” advice from Plimer and McLean et al you should be really frigging worried.
And of course our ensemble, Luke, ST, Hansen etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum know what real vs. ‘faux’ skepticism really is.
What clowns and maroons you AGW true believers are. You claim ‘the science is settled’ on something as complex and as climate. Yet your AGW models are simply that – models- and have the cheek to claim we who point out that AGW is nothing more than a model, a projection, a model based on very incomplete and dubious quality data, are ‘faux’?
We point out with clear data how badly measured, inaccurately represented, and falsely claimed major aspects of AGW projections are, and true believers simply plug their ears and claim the data quality does not matter. what a pathetic joke.
You over employed lazy bureacucrats. No wonder you like AGW: It is job security for people who do not really want to work or produce or do anything that can actually be measured or finished.
“Coho’s back to building heat again – Jack’s beanstalk. Coho – trawling through the literature with a stapler adding things here and there doesn’t build a philosophical position”
This is not fair comment; in several of my posts at Jennifer’s, “Defining the Greens, More Worst AGW papers and Ten worst man-made disasters” I have explained my position on humanity’s relationship with nature; and how it is a relationship which is disparaged by AGW supporters on ideological grounds without vindication by science or rationality.
Luke complains that TCS is a one issue party; this is not true; there are many policy statements being developed by the party and currently we have policies on Energy, Education, the ABC and Land Rights; but in any event the issue of AGW is a complete issue in the sense that it deals with man’s interaction with nature, lifestyle, ethics and the defining characteristic of humanity; technological capacity and scientific endeavour. AGW was never about the weather or climate, it is an attempt to define the moral boundaries of what it means to be human and how the expression of that humanity should be limited and directed.
The people who support AGW are all united by a shared characteristic which has 2 parts; the first is that nature is superior and the primacy of natural values and processes should be the determining factor in human society and existence; the second mantra is that human values are inherently destructive if they diverge from a natural interpretation of humanity and on that basis are morally wrong and destructive; we see this view manifested in myriad ways; through Malthusian principles, through land and fire management, through population debates; through the prism of environmental criteria for any development and most obviously through AGW itself.
AGW is a pseudo-scientific theory; it is entirely based on computer modeling and selection of empirical evidence, or manipulation of that evidence, to support the model algorithms. The irony here is that the pinnacle of human divergence from nature, the setting up and use of quasi-AI, the computers, is being used to produce an ideology demanding that humanity return/revert to a more naturally constrained existence.
TCS do not want to see humanity return to lifestyle conditions which prevailed in the past. TCS belief that the implementation of the proposed measures to combat AGW will inevitably lead to massive erosion of the advances in prosperity which have been made in the last 50 years, the period which is being denigrated by AGW as the period during which the catastrophe of AGW has occurred. If the chimera of AGW is proved to be wrong, which sufficient doubt surely must now have been established, then there will need to be an appraisal of the ‘green’ values and the hypocrisy of the supporters of AGW [particularly sections of the media and some financial sectors] and their relevance to the needs and advancement of humanity.
“Sceptics on the other hand want to hear from everybody because it is the basis of making an informed judgement of the merits or otherwise of a particular view of anything.”
I should frame that. Luke has spent hours putting together informative posts on the science of AGW, with the only response the sound of crickets chirping, or outright abuse.
Hunter- don’t kid yourself that most “scepticism” is unmitigated bullshit. Are you really “that” naive? The level of your arguments and understanding is infantile – furthermore you don’t read anything serious – you’re simple a blog bilge recycler.
Coho says – “I have explained my position on humanity’s relationship with nature; and how it is a relationship which is disparaged by AGW supporters on ideological grounds without vindication by science or rationality.” – oh spew bags Coho – what twaddle.
And on and on Coho goes – proving to me at least that the TCS are a bunch of dangerous anti-science extremists who’d trash the national science effort and consign us to another dark age of unenlightenment.
Coho – what a load of cobblers I don’t come to this issue as a greenie – I come to it as someone looking at “now” climate problems and finding “now” is changing – and “now” can get a lot worse. Risk assessment – imperfect information.
Meanwhile – I note any ideas for solutions/management for/of contemporary climate problems like ongoing Murray drought or a total lack of grass from massive areas of ponded water in the Gulf, or how to allocate water in an overallocated MDB – as my colleague SJT would say “chirping crickets”.
Maybe ask Birdie or Sinkers for help? ho ho ho ho.
OK Coho – I’ll stop spitting
serious policy platform positions needed for your beloved TCS
(1) TCS position if most of the world goes ETS or carbon tax – is it fortress Australia?
(2) TCS position on solar, wind, biofuels (including woody vegetation) and nuclear
(3) TCS position on climate science portfolio investment
(4) TCS position on national and global carbon cycle research
(5) soil carbon in the holistic sense
(6) position on Exceptional Climate Circumstances support
(7) approach to handling resource allocation issues e.g. MDB water resources allocation given “apparent” drying trend – and also mooted development of north Australian water resources
(8) TCS’s position on water sensitive urban design
(9) TCS’s position on bushfire management
(10) TCS’s position on extinction of species due to climatic circumstances
(11) TCS’s position on coastal development and coastal building standards
(12) TCS’s position on management of climate interaction and marine resources, including the GBR
(13) TCS’s position for ensuring rigorous quality review of science (including it’s own zealots!!)
Tell me Coho – what is the TCS’s broader policy positions. I hope TCS not a single item party (kill the ETS, kill CSIRO, kill BoM) in a single field in a single sector.
1-3 sentences one each will suffice ! Impress me. If you guys are serious you’ll have this already.
Louis Hissink:
“… because in your case, they would need a daily semi-trailer to cart yours every morning.”
removal or delivery????
Luke wails:
“Meanwhile – I note any ideas for solutions/management for/of contemporary climate problems like ongoing Murray drought or a total lack of grass from massive areas of ponded water in the Gulf, or how to allocate water in an overallocated MDB – as my colleague SJT would say “chirping crickets”.”
Couldn’t be all the billions being wasted on CO2 research could it??
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Yes Luke, SJT and the other most knowledgeable, please tell us about how your side is SOOOOOOOO effectively allocating the resources. You know, like attacking sceptics!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
SJT@1021
“Luke has spent hours putting together informative posts on the science of AGW, with the only response the sound of crickets chirping, or outright abuse.’
Almost right, Mr T. I’ll just add the edits”
Luke has spent hours putting together ad hominem posts on the sham science of AGW often with links that have nothing to do with the current topic, with the only response the sound of pilgrims of the night, taking out the night soil. (Thanks Louis).
Well Kockhead Kat – come in spinner – yes the money Australia spends on EC, and climate related enviro stuffups dwarfs anything spent on climate research.
You dopey bastard. Thanks for playing.
Hey Coho – are you letting drop-kicks like Kockhead into you broad church? ho ho ho
Says a commentator with an ape-arse for a gravatar. Hahahahahahahaha
Hey Coho – do you let imports like Tadzuka Bivalve into the TCS – or would ASIO have to to vet them first.
Answer to Luke
(1) TCS position if most of the world goes ETS or carbon tax – is it fortress Australia?
Heavy Kevvie has already said Copenhagen will fail; China and India will not join>
(2) TCS position on solar, wind, biofuels (including woody vegetation) and nuclear
See plicies on Websight
(3) TCS position on climate science portfolio investment
Worried about your public tit salary, Luke?
(13) TCS’s position for ensuring rigorous quality review of science (including it’s own zealots!!)
Way way above
i) UN’s Political body IPCC
ii) Australian Department of Climate Change
iii) Way above our denying Chief Scientist Penny Hackett
iv) Way above the US EPA.
Roll over and go to sleep, your sham dream is almost over!
(1) Ducked the question
(2) couldn’t find anything last time I looked. And what a rabid frothing bizarre web site. The Nazi propagandists would have been impressed. Have you been getting tutes from the CEC.
I kacked on these
We support basic freedoms of all Australians
We support family values
We support equal opportunities for all Australians
We support every citizen’s right to live in a law abiding society free from fear and persecution.
We support a return to basic values, good manners and respect for human values within our society.
Barf ! What a load of bulldust. But the classic is “We will defend the hard fought Australian standard of living, lifestyles and freedoms, especially from radical environmental minority groups.”
Yes exactly – if you believe this negative reality inversions must be simple.
(3) not in the slightest – even a funny comment
the rest – so you haven’t a clue – useless denialist scum. Cavalier and reckless.
(13) well if you haven’t got anything on your pet topic you’d have to the most useless grouping of dropkicks ever ?
What a sham organisation if creeps like you are the membership so what do we expect. As you’d expect – no serious answers.
Let’s not duck the first question. Under no circumstances should the party accept the ETS. Those who believe in AGW are deluded and it appears 83% of the Australian population are in this frame of mind. So even if the whole world becomes deluded I will remain Winston Smith.
Luke…I am a proud ‘denialist’ and take offence at being called ‘useless denialist scum’. It’s oxymoronic.
Luke
Much as I hate to agree with you my response to the TCF manifesto is Barf! but then that’s my response to all political manifesto’s.
More to the point my response to an ETS is Barf!Barf!Barf!
The government hasn’t got the balls to tax carbon so they will allow the financial sector to rape and pillage while they pocket some $12 – $20 billion pa.
Small price to pay for our image at Copenhagen – but business as usual at home.
Our status as the world’s largest exporter of coal is safe, its nice to be best at something and let’s face it those export dollars are pretty precious. Why else would the WA government opt for another coal powered plant so they can continue to export gas to Asia. The NSW government could pimp more coal exploration licenses cos the $400 million they received recently wont go far and reselling the water allocations turned in by NSW farmers is petty cash.
The important thing though is for government both state and federal to be firm in in their resolve that AGW is really, really scary and really, really bankable. Will an ETS scheme lead to a decrease in Co2 emissions, probably not but then that’s not what the ETS is about.
“Coho – what a load of cobblers I don’t come to this issue as a greenie – I come to it as someone looking at “now” climate problems and finding “now” is changing – and “now” can get a lot worse. Risk assessment – imperfect information”
Now, now, luke, now now. As for your list;
“1) TCS position if most of the world goes ETS or carbon tax – is it fortress Australia?
(2) TCS position on solar, wind, biofuels (including woody vegetation) and nuclear
(3) TCS position on climate science portfolio investment
(4) TCS position on national and global carbon cycle research
(5) soil carbon in the holistic sense
(6) position on Exceptional Climate Circumstances support
(7) approach to handling resource allocation issues e.g. MDB water resources allocation given “apparent” drying trend – and also mooted development of north Australian water resources
(8) TCS’s position on water sensitive urban design
(9) TCS’s position on bushfire management
(10) TCS’s position on extinction of species due to climatic circumstances
(11) TCS’s position on coastal development and coastal building standards
(12) TCS’s position on management of climate interaction and marine resources, including the GBR
(13) TCS’s position for ensuring rigorous quality review of science (including it’s own zealots!!)”
TCS have policies on a number of hese issues [ie 2, 9 and 11] and we’ll be looking at the others you raise; number 4, however, won’t be prioritised.
Well EL Gordo – if you’re offended good. I’m holding back. I could say worse. Nah pulling your chain like most of the time. El Gordo take a good cold look at yourself – I am tired of being called deluded and an alarmist. Check back through the annals here and see how much shit has been thrown at me. So I just decided – when in Rome – do as the Romans do.
I also resent any generalisations. I’m not for an Australian unilateral ETS and am moderately pro-nuclear.
So be nice to me and I’ll be nice to you !
Coho – sorry I could not find them.
And I am disappointed that many of the big ticket issues that I raise have no consideration at this point.
Remember that Bob Carter has mentioned Plan B – so you’re on the spot here for a position.
You should be looking at the carbon cycle as increased CO2 may change C3/C4 balance. C4 grass savanna clogged with C3 loving woody weeds. CO2 making some plants more frost prone. Or more positively how to breed / genetic engineer to take advantage of extra atmospheric CO2 for gain in yields.
Indeed what’s your climate farm policy?
Will you be funding seasonal forecast research – ENSO, IOD, MJO etc
What are you going to do about the seemingly disturbing news at STR and SAM in terms of research?
Putting all to the sword – burning the battle field and departing on your high horses is not a mature path for the future.
In fact I’d suggest that most of our governments have a pretty wishy washy position on applied climate science. For such a valuable issue we could be doing a lot better.
They’ll be posted in due cause; in the mean time here is the basis of one new and exciting policy which I think you will take special interest in;
http://www3.telus.net/public/rrrobbie/essay/CO2sex.html
“Yet your AGW models are simply that – models- and have the cheek to claim we who point out that AGW is nothing more than a model,”
It’s not cheek, it’s sheer ignorance. Read the IPCC report. There is a lot more to AGW evidence than models.
When he runs out of puff littleSJT just bangs the old IPCC bible again.
Information for new readers,
“Luke” is not one person but that group-photo of brainwashed government boffins you see to the right of their postings.
They used to have a picture of a driibbling alien; unwittingly symbolising the alien nature of the quack CO2 theory they have implanted in their brains.
But the dribbling alien has been replaced by this photograph of state-controlled bearded zombies with the same implant.
No improvement whatsoever.
Information for new readers.
Mack is some dopey dropkick from NZ who’s usually under medication.
So tell us Mack – how do you know what you know. Yes you read it on a blog didn’t you? Capacity for independent thought stopped at Grade 8 when you left (were evicted) from school. Yes we know you got a job as a shepherd for a while but they had to let you go for following the sheep not herding them.
The group photo was actually a pack of zombies from a well known movie. You dope ! You see Mack Truck – We, I, us, them just pander to what you’d like to believe. Proves the point about what gullible morons denialists are. Unselective in your evidence and prone to suggestibility.
You can read anything into the latest image you like. I derived from your gravatar that’s you’re a vacuous hole.
Lukie, can you please explain what a gravatar is for us simpletons thanks. You’ve mentioned it several times now but I am unable to gather the meaning. By the way, I love your posturing comments, they remind me of what a wonderful world it will be under the thumb of the AGW triumphalists.
You’ve got it the wrong way round Lukefolk,
My capacity for independent though started when I left school.
You lot still haven’t any capacity for independent thought and still believe in everthing fed to you in the classroom.
You must be getting a little angry Lukefolk . Sheepjokes?
Dribblesy – the widdle pictures that some posters have. Get yours at http://www.gravatar.com – free service & uses your email as the key to display
Mack – it’s OK – that brutish self confidence from being self-made. Good delusory stuff.
I’ve become an “alarmist” you see (in gravatar) coz that’s how you’d like me to be. I just take Mack’s latest auto-suggestible thoughts and go with it. I am what you need me to be.
One above what happens when you mistype your email address.
Hey how cool is that. A party formed on the basis of being against CO2-bedwettting. Neat.
Lukefolk,
You lot need to do a thousand lines for me – and have it in by tomorrow morning.
“CO2 is not a pollutant”
Yes of course it’s not. We’ve never said it was doofus.
Well that’s good to hear, at least something is getting through to you kids.