Attention: All You Algore Worshipping Global Warming Assholes

[fah-q]

This is how easy it is to edit the wikipedia entries. Go to this link and then look at the history. Then look at the revisions by fah-q.
Ozone depletion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jurched]

It should be noted that OPETHIAN666 is an ignorant bed-wetting Belgian jackass.**
The term ozone depletion is used by liberals to describe two distinct and ridiculous assumptions:: a slow, steady decline, of about 3% per decade, in the total amount of ozone in the earth's stratosphere during the past twenty years and a much larger, but seasonal, decrease in stratospheric ozone over the earth's polar regions during the same period. (The latter phenomenon is commonly referred to as the "ozone asshole".)

Oi, that's a classic.

It should be known that in Belgium, fucking with wikipedia is a crime against humanity, and in the "Little Algeria" section of Brussels, a crime of moral turpitude subject to Sharia law.

If wikipedia is so easily fucked with by criminals of turpitude, then why does Google return a wikipedia link as the top pick for every goddamned search?!

Jurched

 

[Opethian666]

You cite a wikipedia page and you are calling me ignorant? Now I know what a stupid Belgian cunt sounds like. Wikipedia, HAHAHAHAHAHA! Fuckin' Opeth fans, always amusing.

Wikipedia is a good source for all kinds of information. Do you have any reasons to think otherwise? Certainly topics of this magnitude are checked and updated constantly and the information contained is referenced from other, more scientific and official sites. You didn't even link a source when you talked about that gibberish idea of yours. I guess when you have no argument all you can resort to is insults and stereotypes. The way you generalise people like "Opeth fans" also doesn't speak very well for your intellectual capabilities.

Shit, I forgot that you aren't even allowed to talk back against global warming without being subject to hate-crime laws. How about I turn myself in and we split the reward? I might even take public transportation on the trip in. No, who the fuck am I kidding. I will be driving my truck, but not before I rip the cataltic converter off of it!

You're free to talk back, but spreading nonsense like those 2 false claims you made without supporting them is just a bit over the top. What I did is point out your errors. If you're too bigheaded and stupid to be able to take some criticism on your stupid ideas then I guess that's your problem.

This is how easy it is to edit the wikipedia entries. Go to this link and then look at the history. Then look at the revisions by fah-q.

1) I wonder how long your adjustment will stand there before it is corrected.
2) I wonder how many people on this planet amuse themselves with making idiotic changes like that (especially in an article about ozone depletion), when there is uncyclopedia for that.
3) If you really have a problem with the information found in that wikipedia entry, and you stand by your claim, why don't you go ahead and find an official scientific site that supports your claim? I presented my sources, let's see yours. Obviously you won't, since there aren't any sources that support your claim, and on top of that you feel much better just typing random insults to make a fool out of yourself.

 

[fah-q]

Wikipedia is a good source for all kinds of information. Do you have any reasons to think otherwise? Certainly topics of this magnitude are checked and updated constantly and the information contained is referenced from other, more scientific and official sites. What credentials do the moderators have that makes them suitable to decide what goes on that site? They are moderators. The greatest scientific minds of the world are not saving their best stuff for fuckin' Wikipedia. Holy Opeth! You didn't even link a source when you talked about that gibberish idea of yours. I guess when you have no argument all you can resort to is insults and stereotypes. The way you generalise people like "Opeth fans" also doesn't speak very well for your intellectual capabilities. The way you spell "generalize" doesn't speak well for your intellectual capabilities.



You're free to talk back, but spreading nonsense like those 2 false claims you made without supporting them is just a bit over the top. What I did is point out your errors. If you're too bigheaded While I do have a Charlie Brown-like head. I believe the term you were looking for is pig-headed. and stupid to be able to take some criticism on your stupid ideas then I guess that's your problem. Your post wasn't critical, it was an attack. When you come off like a punk, expect others to push back.



1) I wonder how long your adjustment will stand there before it is corrected.
2) I wonder how many people on this planet amuse themselves with making idiotic changes like that (especially in an article about ozone depletion), when there is uncyclopedia for that. You mean Encyclopedia, don't you?
3) If you really have a problem with the information found in that wikipedia entry, and you stand by your claim, why don't you go ahead and find an official scientific site that supports your claim? I presented my sources, let's see yours. Obviously you won't, since there aren't any sources that support your claim, and on top of that you feel much better just typing random insults to make a fool out of yourself.

Drones, such as yourself, refuse to think for themselves. Thus, they are stuck repeating what others say, presenting it as their own opinion. We could both sit here and post links to websites supporting our arguements. Why don't we try some common sense instead. I live in Upstate New York. Normally at this time of year, if we haven't seen snow, the temperature has generally dropped to 35-40 degrees. The past 4 days, it has been at least 50, sometimes 60 degrees. Now, is that because of global warming? In October, Buffalo New York got over 2 feet of snow. (Convert to meters yourself if you are into that metric thing.) Was that because of global warming? Which is it? Am I getting snow because of global warming or, is it hot because of global warming? Do I buy a jacket or sunblock? Or, should I just give it up and set my neighborhood on fire because Al Gore says we are doomed and that is what they do in Compton? Please, enlighten us Opeth-Wan-Kenobi.

 

[Opethian666]

Drones, such as yourself, refuse to think for themselves.

How ironic. I'm perfectly capable to think for myself. I have nothing to gain to believe either way, so why would I develop a cognitive bias for one side? I just go where the evidence leads me. If I was really a drone that can't think for itsself, you would be capable to show me some sources that support your "repairing ozone layer" and "largest forestation ever on earth". The truth is, you are the drone, incapable of presenting arguments, helplessly defenceless.

Thus, they are stuck repeating what others say, presenting it as their own opinion.

Not at all. What I did was see your 2 claims, realise that they were bogus, quickly did some research on the internet and found evidence that they were bogus. 1 source was a wikipedia source because those are much faster to find and I'm not going to waste too much time showing someone who is too pig(did I get it right this time?)headed such as yourself where he went wrong.

We could both sit here and post links to websites supporting our arguements. Why don't we try some common sense instead.

So here we go, you know you can't find any actual sources to support your claims, so you try to shift the evidence you're supposed to provide to something else, because otherwise you would have to admit that you're wrong. That my friend is a real cognitive bias at work in a drone. You're deceiving yourself and that's why you can't even admit to yourself that you're wrong.

I live in Upstate New York. Normally at this time of year, if we haven't seen snow, the temperature has generally dropped to 35-40 degrees. The past 4 days, it has been at least 50, sometimes 60 degrees. Now, is that because of global warming? In October, Buffalo New York got over 2 feet of snow. (Convert to meters yourself if you are into that metric thing.) Was that because of global warming? Which is it? Am I getting snow because of global warming or, is it hot because of global warming? Do I buy a jacket or sunblock?

Regardless how you think of it, you are seeing a climatic change. What do you think global warming is? A simple process that simply elevates the temperature everywhere on earth? Think again. Think GLOBAL. The GLOBAL temperature will rise, that doesn't mean that on every location on earth the temperature will rise. In fact global warming might cause multiple large regions to cool down significantly because of certain sea streams that could cease to exist. The idea of global warming you have in your head is a simplified incorrect one. You're a bit like a young earth creationist misrepresenting the theory of evolution.

Or, should I just give it up and set my neighborhood on fire because Al Gore says we are doomed and that is what they do in Compton? Please, enlighten us Opeth-Wan-Kenobi.

You know what? I haven't even seen that movie or that speech from Al Gore. And if I would see it, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't drastically change my opinion unless it had some very solid arguments and science behind. You see, I am not a drone. I am not what you accuse me of. You are merely projecting something from the inside onto me because your cognitive bias is preventing you from exposing yourself. Why don't you try to take an unbiased, critical look at the world, and realise that we have to start doing something or we are going to shit in the coming century. And even if we aren't going to shit, what harm can it do to be a little careful about the environment? Are you that selfish? Is all that matters to you your blurry little short-term vision of the world? It probably is .

 

[Opethian666]

The way you spell "generalize" doesn't speak well for your intellectual capabilities.

English is not my first language. Let's see you spell generalize in dutch or french?

I do have a Charlie Brown-like head. I believe the term you were looking for is pig-headed

Always nice to learn some more english while here.

Your post wasn't critical, it was an attack. When you come off like a punk, expect others to push back.

Sorry, but when I see so many people typing unsupported lies and their lack of long term vision, I get a little cranky. I agree, it was a little weak of me to make my post so vicious and insulting.

You mean Encyclopedia, don't you?

No, uncyclopedia, the best damn encyclopedia on the net.

 

[fah-q]

Listen Waffles, I am going to make this short and sweet because, something tells me that no matter how compelling a post I write, you will reply with another nonsense filled post.
-Uncyclopedia is the same fuckin' thing as Wikipedia. This is what they had listed for Law and Order "In the Uncyclopedia All things boring and righteous are represented in these seperate yet equally uniportant categories, The Police who instigate crimes, and the District Attorneys who persecute the offenders... These are those categories. (Donk, Donk)"
-I still won't be posting links to a bunch of sites that debunk your moist little theory on global warming. Those of us with lives don't have time to publish a bibliography for the ignorant.
-Riddle me this Waffles. In the 1970's, all cars in the United States were required to fit all new vehicles with catalytic converters. The object was to convert the deadly carbon monoxide (CO) into non-toxic and non-lethal carbon dioxide (CO2). Carbon Monoxide was at the center of the arguement of the global warming jerk-offs back then. Now, all you tree-hugging misanthropes are stating that carbon dioxide is polluting our air. At least, this was one of the central topics of discussion at the Kyoto summit.
The bottom line is, it wouldn't matter if spring water came out of a car's tailpipe. "Activists" like yourself would still whine about the dangers of natural spring water.
It is too bad that you took such offense to the alleged ignorance of everyones posts yet, only singled out mine. I have nothing against you. As a matter of fact. I love your waffles.
On the other hand, I should expect as much from a boy who lives in the country that was a founding member of the European Union.

 

[Opethian666]

-Uncyclopedia is the same fuckin' thing as Wikipedia. This is what they had listed for Law and Order "In the Uncyclopedia All things boring and righteous are represented in these seperate yet equally uniportant categories, The Police who instigate crimes, and the District Attorneys who persecute the offenders... These are those categories. (Donk, Donk)"

Seems like you don't know the meaning of the word sarcasm. Uncyclopedia is a parody of wikipedia, every article is filled with nonsense, that is the whole point of it. Instead of this nonsense being deleted, all things that aren't nonsense or not funny are deleted. Just look up jesus for instance.

-I still won't be posting links to a bunch of sites that debunk your moist little theory on global warming. Those of us with lives don't have time to publish a bibliography for the ignorant.

First of all, I don't have a "moist little theory" about global warming. Yes, I admit that global warming is a very complex issue and nobody really knows what is going to happen in the future. But then again have I ever claimed that global warming WILL happen exactly as some people say it will? All I have done is point out that you made 2 unsupported claims that are easily refuted. I really don't have a stance about global warming, because I admit that I do not know enough about it. I do know though that if there is even the slightest chance of it occuring, we should be cautious about it and take measures. Even if there will be no serious global warming, it's certainly not bad to take actions concerning the improvement and stabilisation of our environment, it will only help us in the long run. As for me being ignorant, please demonstrate how? It's not me who made up 2 lies to persuade people to pick a side on the issue of global warming.
Finding a source for each of your 2 claims would surely not take longer than 10 minutes? That's what it took for me to come up with 2 sources that refuted your claims. 10 minutes is much less than the time you're spending right now evading this argument.

-Riddle me this Waffles. In the 1970's, all cars in the United States were required to fit all new vehicles with catalytic converters. The object was to convert the deadly carbon monoxide (CO) into non-toxic and non-lethal carbon dioxide (CO2). Carbon Monoxide was at the center of the arguement of the global warming jerk-offs back then. Now, all you tree-hugging misanthropes are stating that carbon dioxide is polluting our air. At least, this was one of the central topics of discussion at the Kyoto summit.
The bottom line is, it wouldn't matter if spring water came out of a car's tailpipe. "Activists" like yourself would still whine about the dangers of natural spring water.

That's how science works. As we find out more about the world we live in, we take new measures. Our understanding of processes going on in our environment increases, and our technology to be able to improve our lifestyle evolves with that new understanding. What is so hard to accept about the fact that we continuously try to decrease the damage we cause to the environment that we are dependant from? As for me being a "tree-hugging" activist, I am not in the least. I'm just someone who doesn't like unsupported claims, and who would like to continue living in a nice environment, like most people. I really don't understand what motivates you to have such hatred in attempts to improve the world.

It is too bad that you took such offense to the alleged ignorance of everyones posts yet, only singled out mine. I have nothing against you. As a matter of fact. I love your waffles.

I singled out yours because it was the most blatant. I have nothing against you either, I just have a problem with your claims. And as for the waffles, that's nothing compared to our fries that are a silent terrorist attack, fattening and killing huge amounts of americans every year. It's quite funny how little you probably know about belgium but you still try to be condescending to me by utilising that little information you have on my whereabouts.

On the other hand, I should expect as much from a boy who lives in the country that was a founding member of the European Union.

Here we go again with the generalizations. A true fundamentalist attitude. Everything/one that belongs to x, is bad. Everything/one that belongs to y, is good. Very healthy way of thinking! Besides, what's wrong with the European Union? Do you prefer america's ridiculously irrational cowboy attitude?

 

[fah-q]

Seems like you don't know the meaning of the word sarcasm. Uncyclopedia is a parody of wikipedia, every article is filled with nonsense, that is the whole point of it. Instead of this nonsense being deleted, all things that aren't nonsense or not funny are deleted. Just look up jesus for instance.

First of all, I don't have a "moist little theory" about global warming. Yes, I admit that global warming is a very complex issue and nobody really knows what is going to happen in the future. But then again have I ever claimed that global warming WILL happen exactly as some people say it will? All I have done is point out that you made 2 unsupported claims that are easily refuted. I really don't have a stance about global warming, because I admit that I do not know enough about it. I do know though that if there is even the slightest chance of it occuring, we should be cautious about it and take measures. Even if there will be no serious global warming, it's certainly not bad to take actions concerning the improvement and stabilisation of our environment, it will only help us in the long run. As for me being ignorant, please demonstrate how? It's not me who made up 2 lies to persuade people to pick a side on the issue of global warming.
Finding a source for each of your 2 claims would surely not take longer than 10 minutes? That's what it took for me to come up with 2 sources that refuted your claims. 10 minutes is much less than the time you're spending right now evading this argument.

That's how science works. Thus, supporting the fact that global warming is a theory a.k.a. MYTH. As we find out more about the world we live in, we take new measures. Our understanding of processes going on in our environment increases, and our technology to be able to improve our lifestyle evolves with that new understanding. What is so hard to accept about the fact that we continuously try to decrease the damage we cause to the environment that we are dependant from? As for me being a "tree-hugging" activist, I am not in the least. I'm just someone who doesn't like unsupported claims, and who would like to continue living in a nice environment, like most people. I really don't understand what motivates you to have such hatred in attempts to improve the world.


I singled out yours because it was the most blatant. I have nothing against you either, I just have a problem with your claims. And as for the waffles, that's nothing compared to our fries that are a silent terrorist attack, fattening and killing huge amounts of americans every year. It's quite funny how little you probably know about belgium but you still try to be condescending to me by utilising that little information you have on my whereabouts.



Here we go again with the generalizations. A true fundamentalist attitude. Everything/one that belongs to x, is bad. Everything/one that belongs to y, is good. Very healthy way of thinking! Besides, what's wrong with the European Union? Do you prefer america's ridiculously irrational cowboy attitude?

Talk about your ignorant generalizations.

 

[Opethian666]

Talk about your ignorant generalizations.

The parallels of the way you argue and the way young earth creationists argue are astounding. Bravo! Looks like there's no point in wasting my time with you. I know a good motto for you: ignorance is bliss.

 

[fah-q]

Likewise, a good motto for you is "Another Misanthropic Opeth Fan"

 

[DeadWinterDead]

The problem is... When you Google your sources, or whatever search engine you use, you will receive a biased view on the subject. There are sources for both sides, all you have to do is look up the right thing.

 

[Hell_Awaits]

We had a blizzard on October 23rd that lasted all day, though no snow stuck, and last year it didn't snow until Christmas day. How's that for global warming? More like GLOBAL COOLING. Those global warming assclowns are killing the planet by making it colder....



There are two possible solutions!

1. Elephant Condoms
2. Abortion

...and possibly a third if you can get the elephants to join a suicidal religious cult.

We could teach the elephants abstinence

 

[Jurched]

Listen Waffles, I am going to make this short and sweet because, Uncyclopedia is the same fuckin' thing as Wikipedia.

I love waffles!*

Jurched


*Waffle boy's posts were so boring I couldn't read them.

All I ended up doing was reading the green portions Fah-Q added in his quoted reply.

No wonder Algore is such a store-front mannequin snoozer!

Shit, now I know what an Algore from Bruxelles sounds like!