Climate Change Report

[Warriorbird]

Isn't me posting links and videos in "DUMB THINGS LIBERALS SAY" my commentary enough, or do you actually require me to say "This is something dumb a liberal said" after everything I ever post in that thread?

Sometimes, the reader has to have the intelligence to actually put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4.

Sorry you got 3



I've attacked people for using "..."? Please provide a link, given that I have always posted in that manner.



When he did it, it made an entire page. I attempt not to do that, unless I'm given a post that is chuck full of shit (like the one I'm quoting in this post)



Huh?



People? No, it's just you. AYN RAND, IRAQ WAR, OBAMACARE IS A REPUBLICAN IDEA, etc.. You are like a dog latched on to something you honestly believe is an intelligent thought and you want the whole world know you had one (even when it's not)

You've asked for posts to involve more content. It's pretty difficult to have less content than a single link. It suggests that you're pasting directly out of Drudge.

You ranted on about me using ... for quite a while in the same period of time you attacked me for using emotes. I'm sure you've repeated it multiple times since. The 2008 election comes to mind.

You just dropped five quotes in a post. I'm pretty sure you've done quite a lot more.

You've told cwolff that nobody agrees with him. Backlash too. If nobody agreed with them this board would've degenerated into you and other conservatives having a link only post round robin, like spambots.

The very thing that you accuse me of is something you constantly do. There's a reason that Kranar had such an easy time making a PB political post mad lib. The whole post of yours that we're now discussing is a primary example. IRONY! HYPOCRITE! and so on are the exact equivalent of what you just accused me of, as are things like tossing "idiot" or "chuck full of shit" into an otherwise rational discussion. The Emperor has no clothes. I guess the link only posts are your new version of your image only posts.

[Parkbandit]

Look at minute 3:50. Ross whatever his name is, introduces himself as an environmental journalist. Immediately following his conversation they introduce Moore as a Greenpeace co-founder and lifelong ecologist. To keep things ethical they should have introduced him by what he does now also. They used the journalist current job and the shill's former job.

Should have been "I"m Ross blah blah blah and I'm an environmental journalist" Followed by "I'm Patrick Moore and I'm a communications consultant for Timber, Energy, Chemicals blah blah blah"

We can talk about your video but it's shit. It's kind of funny and I like laughing at the hippies who sound so stupid but it's not journalism. It's at best info-tainment.

I'm still not convinced you've watched the entire video so we can discuss the content of it like you wanted to.

Still waiting...

[Warriorbird]

You realize that was decades ago. Are you suggesting that you've never changed your mind about things years later down the road?

Silliness.

It was decades ago. Yet his environmentalism was even further ago. What do they introduce him with?

[Tgo01]

Look at minute 3:50. Ross whatever his name is, introduces himself as an environmental journalist. Immediately following his conversation they introduce Moore as a Greenpeace co-founder and lifelong ecologist. To keep things ethical they should have introduced him by what he does now also. They used the journalist current job and the shill's former job.

If you want to get technical Ross wasn't an environmental journalist at the time. He had already become an environmental book author and had published a book that was made quite popular by Bill Clinton and was almost finished writing his second book at the time of this video.

In fact according to this site he retired from journalism in 1992 and it doesn't even say he worked as an environmental journalist.

[Parkbandit]

You've asked for posts to involve more content. It's pretty difficult to have less content than a single link. It suggests that you're pasting directly out of Drudge.

You ranted on about me using ... for quite a while in the same period of time you attacked me for using emotes. I'm sure you've repeated it multiple times since. The 2008 election comes to mind.

You just dropped five quotes in a post. I'm pretty sure you've done quite a lot more.

You've told cwolff that nobody agrees with him. Backlash too. If nobody agreed with them this board would've degenerated into you and other conservatives having a link only post round robin, like spambots.

The very thing that you accuse me of is something you constantly do. There's a reason that Kranar had such an easy time making a PB political post mad lib. The whole post of yours that we're now discussing is a primary example. IRONY! HYPOCRITE! and so on are the exact equivalent of what you just accused me of, as are things like tossing "idiot" or "chuck full of shit" into an otherwise rational discussion. The Emperor has no clothes. I guess the link only posts are your new version of your image only posts.

No one suggested they were from Drudge.. try again?
I did that on purpose. Sarcasm is lost on people like you, and for that I apologize. But good news, I made this post in the smallest possible area so you can't get upset about it!
Look at the posts where I am talking to Backlash and cwolff about them being so wrong they have bipartisanship against them. They were specific posts. You have to read the thread to figure that out.
What other words would you like me to use when you post in a hypocritical and ironic way? There is a surefire way to get me to stop pointing this out: Stop posting like you do.

[Parkbandit]

It was decades ago. Yet his environmentalism was even further ago. What do they introduce him with?

Given that they were talking about the environmental movement.. don't you think it's important that they introduce him as someone who was a founding member (even if Greenpeace removed that from his bio after he left) of one of the first environmental groups? I will concede that they should have stated what he does today.. but I don't see how that automatically makes him a shill though.

[cwolff]

If you want to get technical Ross wasn't an environmental journalist at the time. He had already become an environmental book author and had published a book that was made quite popular by Bill Clinton and was almost finished writing his second book at the time of this video.

In fact according to this site he retired from journalism in 1992 and it doesn't even say he worked as an environmental journalist.

More word games and diversions.

[cwolff]

Given that they were talking about the environmental movement.. don't you think it's important that they introduce him as someone who was a founding member (even if Greenpeace removed that from his bio after he left) of one of the first environmental groups? I will concede that they should have stated what he does today.. but I don't see how that automatically makes him a shill though.

It's the very definition of a shill or one who shills to not let the viewer know that this is his job.

[Parkbandit]

It's the very definition of a shill or one who shills to not let the viewer know that this is his job.

Look up the word again. It's actually not the definition.

[cwolff]

Look up the word again. It's actually not the definition.

shill intransitive verb \ˈshil\
: to talk about or describe someone or something in a favorable way because you are being paid to do it

shill [shil] Show IPA Slang.
noun
1.
a person who poses as a customer in order to decoy others into participating, as at a gambling house, auction, confidence game, etc.
2.a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty.
verb (used without object)
3.
to work as a shill: He shills for a large casino.
verb (used with object)
4.
to advertise or promote (a product) as or in the manner of a huckster; hustle: He was hired to shill a new TV show.

shill
A person engaged in covert advertising. The shill attempts to spread buzz by personally endorsing the product in public forums with the pretense of sincerity, when in fact he is being paid for his services.

shill (ʃɪl)

n.
1. a person who poses as a customer in order to decoy others into participating, as at a gambling house.
2. a person whose praises, endorsements, etc., are motivated by self-interest.