Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- From: "Scout" <me4guns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 10:13:16 GMT
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:69ktdrF339879U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9AA699BF7A30Wereofftoseethewizrd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=64734
Thursday, May 22, 2008
**There are a total of 40 (yes, FORTY) climate scientists who signed this
petition. Their opinions are the only ones of interest.
IOW, those that say what Trevor wants to hear are all that he needs to
listen to, those that say something else......well Trevor just tells us to
ignore them. Like much of Trevor's beliefs he picks what he wants to hear,
and ignores the rest. Then wonders why everyone considers him ill informed
and less than objective on his opinions.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- From: Trevor Wilson
- Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- References:
- Consensus or senseless con?
- From: Gray Ghost
- Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- From: Trevor Wilson
- Consensus or senseless con?
- Prev by Date: Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- Next by Date: Re: Study on Micro-stamping as released by UC Davis
- Previous by thread: Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- Next by thread: Re: Consensus or senseless con?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|