ice age civilisations by James Nienhuis (Book Review)

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:40 am

The radius of a sphere is integral to my finding, so I see you are still punching around in a paper bag.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:42 am

Essan · Post by **Essan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:43 am

Some people will show their disagreement to a theory by exposing flaws in the argument or by presenting counter evidence.

Others just throw insults - presumably on the assumption that whoever can come up with the biggest, best, insult must be right.

Guess what? I don't like the latter.

So please, if you disagree with GV's theory, and if you are over 5 years of age, try counter his assertions rationally and intelligently. Or not at all.

Because at the moment there's no question he's winning ......

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:49 am

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:51 am

There's X with another welcome mat of thorns.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:53 am

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:54 am

Talk specifics, or just beat around in your bag.

Essan · Post by **Essan** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:56 am

To be fair to Doctor X he's not to know that I already know a good deal about your theories GV - and that we've come to disagree on just about everything many times before! And (don't tell Marduk this) but I quite enjoy such discussions. Makes a change from arguing over the accuracy of the GFS weather forecast model back on my own forum

I'm not perfect. But hopefully most of the time I'm reasonably polite and friendly, even if I do think you're wholly wrong

I'm sure others do likelwise - but sadly it all gets lost in the flak ......

ed · Post by ed » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:57 am

Essan wrote:Some people will show their disagreement to a theory by exposing flaws in the argument or by presenting counter evidence.

Others just throw insults - presumably on the assumption that whoever can come up with the biggest, best, insult must be right.

Guess what? I don't like the latter.

So please, if you disagree with GV's theory, and if you are over 5 years of age, try counter his assertions rationally and intelligently. Or not at all.

Because at the moment there's no question he's winning ......

sorry. he has avoided every hard question.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:58 am

I have enjoyed the discourses also Essan, I'm just waiting for some informed comments/questions from my antagonists.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:01 am

Give me a "hard" question Ed, but make it an informed and concise one, nothing please like "what about the energy," so familiarize yourself with the model, so you can comment in an informed manner, I don't feel like answering all these questions which have false premises.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:30 am

ed · Post by ed » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:31 am

Genesis Veracity wrote:Give me a "hard" question Ed, but make it an informed and concise one, nothing please like "what about the energy," so familiarize yourself with the model, so you can comment in an informed manner, I don't feel like answering all these questions which have false premises.

I have repeated the energy question 6 times. Why should I believe that you will answer it if I repeat it yey again?

You might provide a reference for magma being 70% water though.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:33 am

you know X with that behaviour you would be banned from every other forum on the internet
why don't you follow your own advice

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:35 am

Ed, the water in lava is easy to google, I'm not a library.

Form a concise question, and I'll answer it, but the premise must be based on the GFM, otherwise, you're just talking apples and oranges.