Wanna-B-Fanboy

I was just WAITING for the rest of the teams to take umbrage with Jones' penchant for disregarding the "gentleman's agreement" of not raiding each other's practice roster developmental players and start raiding Jones'... then I realised- he has **** for Canadians on his PR...

Will you please stop dragging out that same poor mule that you beat over and over?

I am not even exaggerating- I let out a hearty chortle.

I don't know... Do we really get jobbed by the refs? I say we do, but I also acknowledge the fact I do wear some heavily blue tinted glasses. But yeah, I think we get the short end of the stick with calls.

We need to go Double QB in the back field. That would be AWESOME! Can you imagine?

.... and only be flagged once.

I did not! holy ****... thanks for sharing that. So that is a methane bubble? Will need to google some stuff! thanks! Did some reading and came across this: http://www.wired.com/2016/07/theres-good-explanation-bouncy-patch-grass-siberia/

1. That is the point- everyone wins in a discussion. You view it as an argument, that is why you fail. 2. Much of your agenda and narrative is taking a big man-eating **** all over the Bombers- so it's kind of ironic you should whine about being pooped upon. 3. "If I don't (whine about it) I'm basically endorsing your views". Well the same could be said for those vocally opposing your views. 4. Aaaaaand you end of your post with taking a verbal swipe while feigning " poor me"- seriously, just **** off already. 5. you argue like someone with Narcissistic personality disorder. I am not even joking, your post history- it's text book definition.

A few have suggested that your "What, who me" routine coupled with sarcastic and forced civility; could be the reasons why he is angry... Or, or, or- you taking the higher road when in fact you are just as if not more guilty of travelling down that same road as everybody else.

http://climate.nasa.gov/news/2465/2016-climate-trends-continue-to-break-records/ 2016 climate trends continue to break records By Patrick Lynch, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center Chunks of sea ice, melt ponds and open water are all seen in this image captured at an altitude of 1,500 feet by the NASA's Digital Mapping System instrument during an Operation IceBridge flight over the Chukchi Sea on Saturday, July 16, 2016. Credit: NASA/Goddard/Operation IceBridge. Two key climate change indicators — global surface temperatures and Arctic sea ice extent — have broken numerous records through the first half of 2016, according to NASA analyses of ground-based observations and satellite data. Each of the first six months of 2016 set a record as the warmest respective month globally in the modern temperature record, which dates to 1880, according to scientists at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The six-month period from January to June was also the planet's warmest half-year on record, with an average temperature 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.4 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the late nineteenth century. Each of the first six months of 2016 set a record as the warmest respective month globally in the modern temperature record, which dates to 1880. Meanwhile, five of the first six months set records for the smallest monthly Arctic sea ice extent since consistent satellite records began in 1979. This video is public domain and can be downloaded from the Scientific Visualization Studio. Five of the first six months of 2016 also set records for the smallest respective monthly Arctic sea ice extent since consistent satellite records began in 1979, according to analyses developed by scientists at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in Greenbelt, Maryland. The one exception, March, recorded the second smallest extent for that month. While these two key climate indicators have broken records in 2016, NASA scientists said it is more significant that global temperature and Arctic sea ice are continuing their decades-long trends of change. Both trends are ultimately driven by rising concentrations of heat-trapping carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The extent of Arctic sea ice at the peak of the summer melt season now typically covers 40 percent less area than it did in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Arctic sea ice extent in September, the seasonal low point in the annual cycle, has been declining at a rate of 13.4 percent per decade. "While the El Niño event in the tropical Pacific this winter gave a boost to global temperatures from October onwards, it is the underlying trend which is producing these record numbers," GISS Director Gavin Schmidt said. Previous El Niño events have driven temperatures to what were then record levels, such as in 1998. But in 2016, even as the effects of the recent El Niño taper off, global temperatures have risen well beyond those of 18 years ago because of the overall warming that has taken place in that time. The first six months of 2016 were the warmest six-month period in NASA's modern temperature record, which dates to 1880. Credit: NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The global trend in rising temperatures is outpaced by the regional warming in the Arctic, said Walt Meier, a sea ice scientist at NASA Goddard. "It has been a record year so far for global temperatures, but the record high temperatures in the Arctic over the past six months have been even more extreme," Meier said. "This warmth as well as unusual weather patterns have led to the record low sea ice extents so far this year." NASA tracks temperature and sea ice as part of its effort to understand the Earth as a system and to understand how Earth is changing. In addition to maintaining 19 Earth-observing space missions, NASA also sends researchers around the globe to investigate different facets of the planet at closer range. Right now, NASA researchers are working across the Arctic to better understand both the processes driving increased sea ice melt and the impacts of rising temperatures on Arctic ecosystems. NASA's long-running Operation IceBridge campaign last week began a series of airborne measurements of melt ponds on the surface of the Arctic sea ice cap. Melt ponds are shallow pools of water that form as ice melts. Their darker surface can absorb more sunlight and accelerate the melting process. IceBridge is flying out of Barrow, Alaska, during sea ice melt season to capture melt pond observations at a scale never before achieved. Recent studies have found that the formation of melt ponds early in the summer is a good predictor of the yearly minimum sea ice extent in September. "No one has ever, from a remote sensing standpoint, mapped the large-scale depth of melt ponds on sea ice," said Nathan Kurtz, IceBridge’s project scientist and a sea ice researcher at NASA Goddard. "The information we’ll collect is going to show how much water is retained in melt ponds and what kind of topography is needed on the sea ice to constrain them, which will help improve melt pond models." Operation IceBridge is a NASA airborne mission that has been flying multiple campaigns at both poles each year since 2009, with a goal of maintaining critical continuity of observations of sea ice and the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. At the same time, NASA researchers began in earnest this year a nearly decade-long, multi-faceted field study of Arctic ecosystems in Alaska and Canada. The Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) will study how forests, permafrost and other ecosystems are responding to rising temperatures in the Arctic, where climate change is unfolding faster than anywhere else on the planet. ABoVE consists of dozens individual experiments that over years will study the region's changing forests, the cycle of carbon movement between the atmosphere and land, thawing permafrost, the relationship between fire and climate change, and more. For more information on NASA's Earth science activities, Visit: http://www.nasa.gov/earth For more information about NASA's IceBridge, visit: www.nasa.gov/icebridge For more information about the ABoVE mission, visit: http://above.nasa.gov/

Wow... weren't you calling for a change in QB? (If not I am sorry for the remainder of the post) So, you want change at QB and then **** all over them when they make the change? wtf?

Don't you get tired of your shtick? I know many have. You should take a break. Troll/clown hybrid- please stop.

I think this thread would have been more fun if it wasn't an anonymous poll.

I am okay with the robot too- I am just saying they could have used flash bangs or something similar instead, still using the robot for delivery.

I think the pledge should be null and void on account of Insanity. I think the pledge was made in good faith that the nominee would be civil at the very least. There is no way in hell anyone knew what bat **** crazy was gonna come from that Tiny fingered, Cheeto-faced, ferret wearing shitgibbon's Maw.

Of course he did- and just look at all of us chumps feeding the troll. STOP FEEDING THE TROLL!

Because morphing implies changing from one thing into another?

What notion are you rejecting? The interview is about the Sheriff and his take on things, not Don's. That is how an interview works. No one should care what Don thinks he is the interviewer. And you are 100% correct in that Don didn't want any discussion about it at all- it is an interview not a debate. His discomfort comes from trying to corral the Sheriff into an interview format and the Sheriff clearly wanted a debate format. I think Don's personal opinion is moot. The tone is set in the first few lines: The Sheriff is mocking Don's statement about "reeling hearts.. and peace", yet Don only has what the department's have said to go on, he doesn't know if they are lying. I mean wow- he came outta the gates swinging at Don. And it continues through out the interview. The Sheriff is constantly wanting Don's personal opinion- which is a No no in journalism. So I am not too sure what notion of mine you are rejecting? FTR, much of what the Sheriff says is not wrong.

Sure, there is an agenda- just not the one you are probably looking for. The a$wer i$ obviou$. That interview with Sheriff David Clarke was indeed cringe worthy, but that is what it was and interview- not a debate. Every time Don asked David a question, he would answer the question with a loaded question aimed squarely @ Don and demanded he answer the question and take a personal stance. That is a YYYUUUGE no no in journalism. Don played it right and didn't get personally involved. Oh, and the study wasn't dismissed by Don- just the illogical conclusion that Sheriff David was trying to make. It is truly fascinating what differing conclusions we came to with the same video. This is the one, right?

Forget yards, can we not give up more points than we score?

Well to be fair, she was reporting and then transitioned into an op-ed. Unlike Faux News- most news orgs try to separate op-ed from news reporting. Not saying she was wrong- just not the right forum for that. Also- libel. CNN might have been worried about a possible law suit if she continued on.

Drew did that twice in his first year. Oddly enough, I used to have strong faith in his ability to mount that come back drive and win it with time expiring. I do not have that faith in him any more.

I think that was mostly me. Also, when are we going to find out that Root is ******* Morris with a VPN? ****** is a total troll.