Global warming in the Great City

Oinke in the big black pot turning a brighter shade of red.

Found it!

Moffie the gullible fool followed by Moffie the stinking liar.

Apologies, when I bumped this old thread I thought it would bump in Mike's Gripes, not the rugby section.

Admins are welcome to move it.

This is the thread where Moffie demonstrated just what a pompous ass he is and how he is such a liar that when he realised what a fool he'd made of himself, he edited his post quickly so he wouldn't appear as such a pompous hypocrite. Then he lied about whether he edited his post or not.

But no worries, that's all just by the way. The real laugh is Moffie's source. Read the whole thread and click on the link to Moffie's sources.

As many of you know, I see a lot similarities between Moffie and Bozo, the strongest resemblance being the juvenile and pathetic lengths they'll go to to try and pretend they didn't make fools of themselves when they clearly did.

The above is about the best example I can think of to make my case.

Here is the link I mentioned . . . these two guys, Randy Mann and Cliff Harris are Moffie's sources.

If you click that link, you'll also see the graph that doesn't show up in the thread for some reason.

Face facts the Globalist hoax of man made climate change has been totally destroyed and the motivations of these maniacs is well know to all but the brainwashed and ignorant.
Mozzie was right about this BS from day one.

You can't expect the human population to increase from millions to 8 billion and not affect the climate drastically...forests cleared, massive cities and the energy and farms for feeding 8B mouths...focussing on CO2 and methane alone to curb the change is daft...we need to protect our oceans from pollution and adapt to the changes in the climate...the climate changes regardless of our influence, even if we could go net neutral with regards to CO2...we will have to be able to the natural inevitable changes ...

That’s your big reveal Sméagol? Gosh I hope it didn’t take too long to find it and gosh, yes, contrary to Al Gore’s work which got the Nobbie Prize from the Science, there’s still snow on Kilimanjaro.

But I find nothing I said on this string I would change, except I’m now more of the view that a third of warming occurred before man made CO2 could possibly have caused it.

So what exactly is your point.

Well then answer the question I asked you about 4 times on this thread . . . Mr I-never-lie . . . did you edit your post to remove some of the more condescending and patronising comments after your sources were exposed as frauds?

Put on your big boy pants and answer the question.

Was this the post I edited:

Well you see Shark the trouble lies in how you ask the question. Asking the question, framing it right, is half the battle. And if you have studied as many of these macro statistical efforts as I have, as a doctoral student, consultant and executive you conclude that researchers frame the question to get the results they want.

Don't believe these studies without doing your homework is my advice.
What I'm saying beyond that is macro statistical studies are controlle

As for me ‘running away’ Sméagol…..have you finally accepted the existence of the time difference….you know time zones.

Rofl

Rooitwit put on your very large xxxxxl size pants and just admit you were duped by the Open Border WEF Globalist lie about man made climate change, the most destructive hoax in history aimed directly at Western Nations.

This British Peer, like the highly esteemed Beeno, knew what was happening prior to 2016.
Take aook what he said and be amazed how right he was. Beeno of course must ttrust his over worked back to take another extended bow!😀
link text

https://x.com/madelynrogers/status/2106362183697191014?s=20
Must view video.

Just answer the question, coward, did you or did you not edit one of your posts on this thread once you realised how much egg you had on your face and how pompous and patronising you sounded before your sources were exposed as frauds?

It's just a yes or a no required.

Once again, this is an example of the kind of lengths you'll go to to try and pretend you haven't made a fool of yourself . . . so keep squealing and squirming if you haven't plucked up the courage or the integrity.

Just read, chump. It's all in the comments above.

You are a coward and a liar.

This is what you copied and pasted:

Rooinek
CAPTAIN
18,117 posts
09 Jan 2015 at 21:15
#29
Enough ripping into the jumped-up and boastful old fossil who pretends he's some kind of expert on global warming, let me rather add to the global warming record . . .
"Well you see Shark the trouble lies in how you ask the question. Asking the question, framing it right, is half the battle. And if you have studied as many of these macro statistical efforts as I have, as a doctoral student, consultant and executive you conclude that researchers frame the question to get the results they want.
Don't believe these studies without doing your homework is my advice.
What I'm saying beyond that is macro statistical studies are controlled by how the null hypothesis is framed.

And here is the post captured by Shark24:

mozart

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 10263RE: Science vs Creation science . . .
January 08, 2015, 22:54:37
Well you see Shark the trouble lies in how you ask the question. Asking the question, framing it right, is half the battle. And if you have studied as many of these macro statistical efforts as I have, as a doctoral student, consultant and executive you conclude that researchers frame the question to get the results they want.

Don't believe these studies without doing your homework is my advice

……….

So exactly the same post, but Shark’s version omits the last sentence…..which likely is just a bit he didn’t copy and only amplified an existing thought.

…….

So what’s your point.

Calling Sméagol …come out and play

Is this the most humiliating fight pick ever….Sméagol pretending nobody knows.

.

So here's a summary of this thread . . .

Moffie puts up a graph that is clearly both ignorant and biased, but it does support Moffie's theory so he posts it anyway, adding in his pompous, pretentious and boastful manner: "Asking the question, framing it right, is half the battle. And if you have studied as many of these macro statistical efforts as I have, as a doctoral student, consultant and executive you conclude that researchers frame the question to get the results they want.
Don't believe these studies without doing your homework is my advice."

He also suggests that the graph is so clever and so interesting that someone should write a paper based on it.

Rooinek does a bit of research on Moffie's sources and finds out that the one - Cliff Harris - is a "climatologist" without a single qualification and is also a Young Earth Creationist who believes he can tell what the weather was like on a specific day in the year 2500 BC, while the claim to fame of the other - Randy Mann - is that he occasionally does weather forecasts on his local radio station.

The graph that these two clowns concocted is what Moffie is basing his original post on . . . while suggesting other posters should do some "homework" before posting (LMAO!) but when Moffie realises his blunder (after my post exposing his sources as frauds) he goes back and edits his earlier post to remove the bit I quoted above hoping that removing it means he doesn't come across as such a boastful fool.

Later when the thread is revived the coward refuses to answer the question as to whether he edited his post or why he did it. When the post is revived a second time, he outright lies.

After all that, the crimson faced fool is now claiming he's won some kind of point and I'm the one who shot himself in the foot.

There's a perfect example of the lengths that this pompous and self-important old relic will go to to try and pretend he didn't get an avalanche of egg all over his stupid face.

I rest my case.

As far as the man made climate change hoax is conserved you have no case Rooitwit. Best admit to the board you got it all wrong.

And while you’re about it….comment on this:

Mozart
COACH
50,791 posts
Mozart
05 Oct 2026 at 17:38
So you still think he’s got ‘even slower’ or perhaps you just can’t bring yourself to admit what’s obvious to anybody who saw last Saturday’s game. Liar….how? Coward…how? Give us examples of those two attributes. But be careful the last time your tried that, two days ago, you ended up having to avoid the string for all money

Still hiding Sméagol, probably wise……look at this post by Shark24 reproducing a post of mine:

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 10263RE: Science vs Creation science . . .
January 08, 2015, 22:54:37
Well you see Shark the trouble lies in how you ask the question. Asking the question, framing it right, is half the battle. And if you have studied as many of these macro statistical efforts as I have, as a doctoral student, consultant and executive you conclude that researchers frame the question to get the results they want.

…….

Note the time of that post January 8, 22:54. Now note the time of the first response on this string.

WA
Wardad
PRO
6,663 posts
09 Jan 2015 at 04:54
#2
Meanwhile in Australia we had our hottest YEAR since records were kept with ongoing droughts and bushfires .Why it should be more correctly called climate change ,as evidenced by these 2 extreme weather events .

…….

So my post which you have reproduced was made before any responses on this string. Conclusion, it wasn’t made on this String. And if you read the string heading you will note….its linked to what I assume is a String called Science vs Creation Science. But regardless, if the time stamp of my post is before any responses on this string…how could I have made it on this String without it appearing or being replaced by another edited string of mine with the same time stamp. And if it wasn’t posted on this String…the fact that you can’t find it proves exactly nothing.

So Sméagol, you have a problem…..where is there evidence of a January 8th post on this thread, except for the first post which wasn’t a response to Shark and has an earlier time stamp.Remember how I schooled you about edits not changing a post’s time stamp on the old site? Seems you haven’t learned your lessons.

Whoopsie!

‘but when Moffie realises his blunder (after my post exposing his sources as frauds) he goes back and edits his earlier post to remove the bit I quoted above hoping that removing it means he doesn't come across as such a boastful fool.’

So Sméagol I go back and edit my earlier post which has to have a January 8 date, in response to your ‘revelation’, ….but oops there is no such post edited or unedited. Inconvenient, I’m sorry, but there it is…..the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

Don’t be stranger now…..hahaha!

Dear Tom&Jerry&Associates, asseblief, move this post somewhere else.

Let me rephrase, if you are still claiming I edited my post….point out the post which was edited. Or just stop lying. People lie hoping others might be fooled by that. But sometimes you come across somebody who is lying despite knowing those he is addressing know he is lying. That is your disgustingly cynical liar, poorly raised in a low class environmen….that's you Sméagol.