1.  
   phyzx from a chair says:

   Dec 17, 14:01

   phyzx from a chair says:Dec 15, 21:41
   "What exactly is going to replace this essential ( non polluting ) product ?
   The IPCC statement stinks ( an its not the C02 ) ."
   What happened to my post ???
   VM actively removing good arguments ? Pro greenie dirty tricks ?
2.  
   AJH from London says:

   Dec 16, 16:18

   Greenie from wheelie bin you would be hungry if you were at my house as recycle and compost 99% of my rubbish. Yep tut tut I second that.
3.  
   edward from pinner says:

   Dec 16, 12:23

   George my post was not directed at you, was not offensive and you chose to reply to it criticising my spelling and grammar. You did not reply to point I was trying to make, instead you criticised me and yet you now go on to accuse me of offensive posts, something that you have no proof about at all, that’s very offensive and un true.
4.  
   edward from pinner says:

   Dec 16, 11:37

   George it is amazing how you can miss the point, it would seem the only thing you care about is spelling and grammar.
5.  
   George Findlay from Kent says:

   Dec 16, 09:57

   phyzx from a chair says:Dec 15, 21:41
   "What exactly is going to replace this essential ( non poluting ) product ?
   The IPCC statement stinks ( an its not the C02 ) ."
   phyzx, as always we are sticking to thebasic theme of the global warming discussion by contributing masses of verifiable evidence, but the response from the green supporters is invariably a barrage of offensive nonsense with no alternatives to reality on offer.
   Human activity does not affect earth's atmospheric temperature, abundant evidence proves this obvious fact to be correct.
   A well rehearsed scam that fails miserably simply because their is no supporting scientific evidence on offer.
   The governments believe what they want to believe, but the sensible majority can think for themselves.

Comments page 10 of 617