Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ubiquitous Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Baltimore Bridge Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 13:56:32 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 55 Message-ID: References: <54ecndjJKpe_QZn7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 17:56:33 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6c62e8f2482cea7440a78110688e977d"; logging-data="86822"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rsYN8yWXToWl3H038Zorggyc6mJqt4Jc=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:SUVm2HjEoiOw2RAwjP4eP4TGTxQ= X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.12N (x86 32bit) Bytes: 3114 In article , fredp1571@gmail.com wrote: > On 4/1/24 9:59 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2024 at 2:39:45 PM PDT, "FPP" wrote: >>> On 4/1/24 3:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> FPP wrote: >>>>> On 3/31/24 4:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>> FPP wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/30/24 5:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>> trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/30/24 2:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Given that the enviro-kooks have been predicting sea level rise since >>>>>>>>>> the late 90s, even famously direly warning that Miami would be >>>>>>>>>> underwater by 2011, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Shockingly I googled this and it returned zero hits. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Google Search is run by an AI that doesn't even recognize the existence >>>>>>>> of white people. The Agenda is baked into its algorithms. Its search >>>>>>>> results are no longer worthy of trust and confidence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regardless, I can't believe you even needed to check Google to see >>>>>>>> whether the enviro-loons have been screeching about sea level rise. It's >>>>>>>> kinda one of their articles of faith, Hutt, you slouching pus-bucket. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> You've been told this for decades. >>>>>> >>>>>> You're claiming I've been told for decades that Hutt couldn't find >>>>>> anything about enviro-kooks pushing sea-level rise on Google? >>>>>> >>>>>> Do tell... >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Did tell. For decades. >>>> >>>> Well then it shouldn't be a problem for you to quote back an instance >>>> where you told me 10 years ago about something that only occurred this >>>> past week. >>>> >>>> Put it here--> >>> >>> Nope. >> >> I'll take that as your concession. > >You'll take it as I don't give a shit. In other words, you lost another debate. -- "Rhino, when do I say things I *can't* back up with citations of fact? Go ahead... go and find something I stated as fact that you don't think I can back up." -- FPP