Has anyone worked out how you pronounce Covfefe?
I say it in my head as "cov-fee-fee".
Or is it "Cov-feff-ee"?
I say it in my head as "cov-fee-fee".
Or is it "Cov-feff-ee"?
Last edited:
General / Off-Topic Covfefe ! We shall have the explanation one day
- Thread starter Patrick_68000
- Start date
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
I usually pronounce it after a couple of pints.
You mean that Trump is drunk from morning to night ?
Trump isn't drunk, he's just a moron.
It's hard to tell the difference though.
Minonian
Banned
Hey! Why You don't call him in his real name? Trollmpfh.Trump isn't drunk, he's just a moron.
It's hard to tell the difference though.
The United States of Britain
Ahh! I thought you meant for me to go back and give them a practical and very personal demonstration of what an assault rifle can do, and maybe keep those colonials under control. You can't have any presidential assassinations if you don't have any presidents.
Yeah and no doubt they would have amended it to insist that everybody should carry one at all times.
Ahh! I thought you meant for me to go back and give them a practical and very personal demonstration of what an assault rifle can do, and maybe keep those colonials under control. You can't have any presidential assassinations if you don't have any presidents.
Let your freak flag fly man!
Last edited:
manipulated news
[video=youtube;aI2AIu9oBJg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI2AIu9oBJg[/video]
Minonian
Banned
[video=youtube;cYQdogPMuRc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYQdogPMuRc[/video]
Minonian
Banned
Minonian
Banned
It's hard to see anything else on him.
Edit; And BTW? I never talk anything else just the matter in hand, which is right now Trumph if i do otherwise, I let you know, and if you think otherwise?
It's just the work of your fantasy.
This charade does not exist, and never existed.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
Edit; And BTW? I never talk anything else just the matter in hand, which is right now Trumph if i do otherwise, I let you know, and if you think otherwise?
It's just the work of your fantasy.
This charade does not exist, and never existed.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
Last edited:
CNN is just as fake as any other news outlet, they only run with their agenda, just like any news outlet out there, there are only a few who actually report the news.
the BBC/ITV/Channel 4 also wanted to record the same scene lol...(CNN said no, it's an exclusive)
But even when it put in front of people, they will ignore it, make excuses for it, rather than admit they where wrong (to believe such news)
example, the Manchester attack, they said Muslims where giving free lifts, and showed a photo of Sikh... hard to find that 'mistake' now as new has been adjusted when people complained
...And i hear the Sikh and Muslims don't get along, so very culturally insensitive to mix them up...just because of how they look..
and....
Keep believing trendies
' Originally Posted by Robin of Spiritwood View Post (Source)
Now you are going to make the case that EVERY GOVERNMENT on the planet is guided by "pseudo intellectuals", but Donald Trump is the real genius?'
I was referring to the people in this thread...
as we have seen in the another thread, people ridiculing anyone that says climate chance is not man made for
i gave a reasonable theory on how they may be correct.
*set up;
-Not saying humans haven't increased Co2 faster than a normally cycle.
-Not saying humans Co2 doesn't have some impact.
-Not saying there is not climate change.
-Am saying, that huamn impact is at best, guess work (for reasons)
-Temperatures and Co2 go in a parallel cycle, as in ice cores
The question is causation not correlation. Why, because we have seen the cycles before human interactions.
*Keep in mind;
We don't know much about the inner earth. (We have guess work from gravimetris)
We have learnt there are vast oceans of water under the surface (See, that was not in the text books not to long ago.. we really know very little)
Scientific organisation do not branch outside the scope of their funding (else they get no funding.)
Scientist hold mainstream views for career safety ('science moves forward one death at a time'), and work on projects that are sure to revel profitable results...I think Einstein was the last one to brake the mold.. aft his relativity breakthroughs, he had the luxury of looking for the theory of everything (yielded no final results) --- he was a star, didn't need to produce profitable results in a timescale
In general, scientist don't question the foundations they work with (understandable, I did this with the max Planck, getting down to his dimensional analyse of units,... dam, that was hard to follow)
..so it beast to believe it's correct and not wastes the time (because in most cases it is, or at least the best we can understand)... and you not going to look back at what is accepted and undermine it (if there is reason) when your projects is based on it...career suicide. Self preservation, fight tooth and nail to keep it 'true' and ridicule anyone that say other ways. So safety and validity, organisation reach a consensus (smoking's good for you)... and it all adds up as long as not one can undermined the foundation research (via ridicule)
*all that said.. here's a theory of how the Co2 cycle works and why we are wasting cash on something we can't stop (maybe slow by a tiny amount)... and parts of this have been in front of nasa scientist, and it hasn't been laughed out the room, as they don't know... they don't have the info... but its not being researched.
Internal heating via Solar winds and energetic particles (no, not 2012 the movie...never watched that trash/, but a good way to ridicule the idea, eh? anyone talks about internal heating...see how it works).
We are lead to believe that's the earth internal retains heat via radioactive decay (probably true, seem reasonable, and a agree) and that is the model we have ><
We understand that energy will dissipate to a less energetic form. Sunlight to Inferred (as with the greenhouse system)... so what about the sola wind?
We are now seeing more and more auroras , brilliant amours we would expect form X class flares, but we see them from C class, and even just high winds. Connecting from the ionosphere to the poles.. direct feeding of charge is happening more. where does that charge go?
Anyone that understand electrons will under what happens... it's conducted and faces resistance in the conductive material... this changes the form of energy into heat. Thus, making it one of the contributors to internal heat.
-------
so we have an understanding of how the sun can heat the earth internally (theoretically, and as good as the other models in text books)... this is not tinfoil, its an excepted theory but one that is not receiving much research (not main steam, we already have a model in books, why go back and look at it again ><, would have to change books, people with qualification relating to it become devalued... a hole word of plain.. bet to use the consensus*1)
So, a question? what could be behind the warmer oceans and see level raise?
-It could be Co2 and human action
-it could be solar winds/cosmic rays and internal oceanics expanding from the heat produce from said winds (something that was not in the climate models, as it too new)
-It could be Trump's hot air.
only one of these theoretical reasons I would really question ' It could be Co2 and human action' because we see the cycles.
We see heat raise and co2 rise at the same time... The co2 will trap more heat, but its is the cause or a result of something else.. leading into a positive feed back cycle
Co2 locked away in subterranean wasters and rocks, saturated co2 and other gasses, gets heated up and it comes out of solution. This lead to more co2, taping more heat (not a human action).
because there is more Co2, less heat can escape the earth, so internal heat cant either.. positive cycle.
As the earth heats, we see more an more humidity, producing more storms. This is an important balancing part of the cycle. When the heating it happening, and more Co2, the storms and weather go wild*2... as the cycle start to decline, the storm are still there, but play a very important part... They move the Co2 back into the sub terrain... via saturation and erosion...
and the cycle continues!
So, if this is a possibility, and we are wasting time putting up virtue singling wind farms, to put the cycle of by a few decades, instead of preparing for something we cant stop... then the green movement it a pointless money grab... I wonder how many paper coving this angle will have been taken into account when polling (I guess near zero, it's not main steam or would say it confirms it because I said ' Not saying humans Co2 doesn't have some impact.' right at the start.. it's believed to have happened in these polls)
Don't belittle people that think the human connection is incorrect... it well could be!
*1) see following the main line, having the most people say the same thing, don't mean its golden (it may be, but it's not a qualifier)...
If theories are changed , people using the old theories are now out of date and out of work. For protection, you need to keep together and say the same lines.... and never look back over that, that has already been established. If you think this is not true, especially in science, you are kidding your self.
*2) one reason why at this point, I would not count the record ice caps as a sing of cooling... this is redistribution of heat, and with more moisture in the are, we would expect to see more deposits on the poles.
-Not saying humans haven't increased Co2 faster than a normally cycle.
-Not saying humans Co2 doesn't have some impact.
-Not saying there is not climate change.
-Am saying, that huamn impact is at best, guess work (for reasons
)-Temperatures and Co2 go in a parallel cycle, as in ice cores
The question is causation not correlation. Why, because we have seen the cycles before human interactions.
*Keep in mind;
We don't know much about the inner earth. (We have guess work from gravimetris)
We have learnt there are vast oceans of water under the surface (See, that was not in the text books not to long ago.. we really know very little)
Scientific organisation do not branch outside the scope of their funding (else they get no funding.)
Scientist hold mainstream views for career safety ('science moves forward one death at a time'), and work on projects that are sure to revel profitable results...I think Einstein was the last one to brake the mold.. aft his relativity breakthroughs, he had the luxury of looking for the theory of everything (yielded no final results) --- he was a star, didn't need to produce profitable results in a timescale
In general, scientist don't question the foundations they work with (understandable, I did this with the max Planck, getting down to his dimensional analyse of units,... dam, that was hard to follow)
..so it beast to believe it's correct and not wastes the time (because in most cases it is, or at least the best we can understand)... and you not going to look back at what is accepted and undermine it (if there is reason) when your projects is based on it...career suicide. Self preservation, fight tooth and nail to keep it 'true' and ridicule anyone that say other ways. So safety and validity, organisation reach a consensus (smoking's good for you
)... and it all adds up as long as not one can undermined the foundation research (via ridicule)*all that said.. here's a theory of how the Co2 cycle works and why we are wasting cash on something we can't stop (maybe slow by a tiny amount)... and parts of this have been in front of nasa scientist, and it hasn't been laughed out the room, as they don't know... they don't have the info... but its not being researched.
Internal heating via Solar winds and energetic particles (no, not 2012 the movie...never watched that trash/, but a good way to ridicule the idea, eh? anyone talks about internal heating...see how it works
).We are lead to believe that's the earth internal retains heat via radioactive decay (probably true, seem reasonable, and a agree) and that is the model we have ><
We understand that energy will dissipate to a less energetic form. Sunlight to Inferred (as with the greenhouse system)... so what about the sola wind?
We are now seeing more and more auroras , brilliant amours we would expect form X class flares, but we see them from C class, and even just high winds. Connecting from the ionosphere to the poles.. direct feeding of charge is happening more. where does that charge go?
Anyone that understand electrons will under what happens... it's conducted and faces resistance in the conductive material... this changes the form of energy into heat. Thus, making it one of the contributors to internal heat.
-------
so we have an understanding of how the sun can heat the earth internally (theoretically, and as good as the other models in text books)... this is not tinfoil, its an excepted theory but one that is not receiving much research (not main steam, we already have a model in books, why go back and look at it again ><, would have to change books, people with qualification relating to it become devalued... a hole word of plain.. bet to use the consensus*1)
So, a question? what could be behind the warmer oceans and see level raise?
-It could be Co2 and human action
-it could be solar winds/cosmic rays and internal oceanics expanding from the heat produce from said winds (something that was not in the climate models, as it too new)
-It could be Trump's hot air.
only one of these theoretical reasons I would really question ' It could be Co2 and human action' because we see the cycles.
We see heat raise and co2 rise at the same time... The co2 will trap more heat, but its is the cause or a result of something else.. leading into a positive feed back cycle
Co2 locked away in subterranean wasters and rocks, saturated co2 and other gasses, gets heated up and it comes out of solution. This lead to more co2, taping more heat (not a human action).
because there is more Co2, less heat can escape the earth, so internal heat cant either.. positive cycle.
As the earth heats, we see more an more humidity, producing more storms. This is an important balancing part of the cycle. When the heating it happening, and more Co2, the storms and weather go wild*2... as the cycle start to decline, the storm are still there, but play a very important part... They move the Co2 back into the sub terrain... via saturation and erosion...
and the cycle continues!
So, if this is a possibility, and we are wasting time putting up virtue singling wind farms, to put the cycle of by a few decades, instead of preparing for something we cant stop... then the green movement it a pointless money grab... I wonder how many paper coving this angle will have been taken into account when polling (I guess near zero, it's not main steam or would say it confirms it because I said ' Not saying humans Co2 doesn't have some impact.' right at the start.. it's believed to have happened in these polls)
Don't belittle people that think the human connection is incorrect... it well could be!
*1) see following the main line, having the most people say the same thing, don't mean its golden (it may be, but it's not a qualifier)...
If theories are changed , people using the old theories are now out of date and out of work. For protection, you need to keep together and say the same lines.... and never look back over that, that has already been established. If you think this is not true, especially in science, you are kidding your self.
*2) one reason why at this point, I would not count the record ice caps as a sing of cooling... this is redistribution of heat, and with more moisture in the are, we would expect to see more deposits on the poles.
where as other just called people silly and jumped on the band wagon... with nothing to add but parrot whet the have been told. (your wrong because <name> said so)
Its' sad, the mains steam seem to tell dumb people they are smart, and knock down the smart people (control thing? not the first time in history that this has happened). You are intellectual if you can remember what you are told... not for being creative and productive;
This is whey we see so many pointless university courses, and bureaucratic jobs that product nothing ( oh the tears when the brexit vote came in, all the students that had done EU studies, and now they would be useless )
Last edited: