Wanna-B-Fanboy

How About....

You obviously haven't been to the Blue Bomber Discussion part of these forums...

Training camp fodder. I think we will be seeing a few less than IDeal OLmen signed IN the next little While to fill I

Hey! Read the title! There is NOTHING fun about your post- stick to the topic, so help me... Yeah- you get a frowny face and a stormy cloud:

Yup, need another serviceable back up in case our NI-RB goes down- but it does not need to be at the same position.

I think we go: 12 pop-tarts - 2 stormy clouds - and 4 Buzz Aldrins With a Grey Cup victory this year. (one of these years I will be right)

Not the same situation: Wily is South of 30 with many years ahead of him as franchise QB. Burris is north of Methuselah's age, probably in his final year for Harris to Transition into Franchise QB. So no, "Desjardin schooling Walters again" is a silly thing to say.

Forget Hilary- they NEED Bernie.

Good Gravy! I am loving this Republican race! I would LOVE a Trump/Palin ticket! http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/palin-trump-campaign-boag-1.3413174

Maybe Standing outside said free agent's home with megaphone in hand... Stripper-gram? Novelty fortune cookie? I dunno, just floating some ideas here. Edit: I like quoting your posts- give a whole new (and natural) dynamic to our forum names.

If our team starts taking on the persona of it's head coach and starts playing the Way MOS did, people will be coming out in droves.

Actually, I would recommend the "Machete Mash-up". Watch in this order: IV: A New Hope V: Empire Strikes Back II: Attack of the clones III: Revenge of the Sith VI: Return of The Jedi Skip I: The Phantom Menace all together. It helps preserve the surprise factor in many instances and sets up nicely Luke's struggle. Huge bonus... Jar Jar Binks gets less than a dozen lines. Interesting tidbit to make II much less painful to watch: There is a rumour that Obi Wan and Padme might have had some fling early on, or something but are downplaying it. Edit: But really, you don't even need to bother with I, II or II. Its more there for back story more than anything really. As long as you watch IV, V and VI- that's integral.

Sorry TUP, I am not attacking you personally- just your grasp on science. You are a good egg, I have admired many of your posts on Football, movies and so on- but not your take on science. Don't take it personally- I don't believe I have attack anyone personally on these boards- If I have, I am sorry.

Well, the above sounds like something you would spout off sans-sarcasm- you can't fault me. You are not wrong with these statements... however, in the context you are implying- you are just plain wrong.

Look, you can be a giant jerk here, that's fine. You are just like every single other warm-monger I know, who just twists words and then calls you names if you dare disagree with the bogus "consensus". What I said was that there have been zero predictions about man-made climate change that have come true. Zero. So why is that if the "science" is so solid? That's all I said. I didn't mention evolution or gravity, so why even bring them up? The thing is, you don't give any stock to science- it is difficult to have a rational and realistic discussion when you don't even acknowledge science. Listening to you is akin to having a discussion about Evolution that doesn't give any legitimacy to scientific evidence... if someone who does not believe in science begins to shout and yell about Adam and Eve, they are quickly cut out of the discussion or given very little credibility if any. You have no credibility when discussing the science or evidence of AGW. This is not to say you don't have valid concerns, don't get me wrong, you have very legitimate concerns you just refuse to take into consideration the evidence and science in your concerns.

Except that Miami was supposed to be under water several years ago, and it still hasn't happened. If the science is "solid", why has every single prediction made by said "science" been dead wrong? There is sooo much wrong in these two post- all you get is a snide remark, sorry. I am starting to expect a few gems from you two: -the earth is only 6000 yrs old- dinosaur bones? those were put here as God's test or the devil to trick us -Gravity has not been proven, it's only a theory. -Evolution? Just a theory, unless you include mud or clay as a point of origin. -Earth is round? Come on! -Earth goes around the sun? MADNESS! Just saying, "every single prediction made by said "science" been dead wrong?" gives us a clear indication where you two are coming from- there really is no room at the grown up table for you two, you guys get relegated to the kiddie table.

There is so much awesome in this post.

The sun will explode, regardless of human intervention. We all accept this is true don't we? Seriously, what's your ******* point?

Isn't he an ex-con? and not in the "oh, my political leanings have shifted left" ex-con... but in a "was convicted of fraud" ex-con?

A Grey Cup. anything else is window dressing.

It was as much a secret as Christoph Walsh being Blofeld in spectre. They tried to deny it but everyone knew the story before the movie came out. Guess I don't need to go watch Spectre now.

So only scientists should have an opinion? There is contradictory "science". Seems even scientists dont know. the problem is, there is also a lot of bullshit parading around as science that people keep bringing up. Here are some things that we can accept as true though... The Eath has warmed and cooled on it's own for a variety of reasons in the past and will continue to do so in the future The greenhouse effect is real, this is not up for debate CO2 is a greehouse gas, this is not up for debate Our species has emitted a metric **** ton of CO2 in the last 200 years, this is a fact and not up for debate. So you put all those things together and yeah there is a whole lot of overwhelming evidence pointing towards our actions as a species impacting climate.How much? Well that's where the debate comes in, and what's to be done about it? That's the biggest debate that should be happening. The science is pretty straightforward and trying to hand wave it away with arguments like "Well the Earth warms and cools naturally" aren't scientific they're little better than being a flat earther or creationist. Just flies in the face of real science. I ♥ you. Aaaaand cue KBF's triple "D" "Deny, Deflect, Denigrate" I'm the one who "denigrates"? Who is the one posting nonsense about "Front Groups" and only looking at one side of the whole debate? Who is the one denigrating "Friends of Science" but turning a complete blind eye to the Tides Foundation? Who funds the Green Party in Canada? The Sierra Club? Hint - it's not Canadians. Nice, you mixed this one up a bit: Colour coded for ease of understanding: Deny Deflect Denigrate

So only scientists should have an opinion? There is contradictory "science". Seems even scientists dont know. the problem is, there is also a lot of bullshit parading around as science that people keep bringing up. Here are some things that we can accept as true though... The Eath has warmed and cooled on it's own for a variety of reasons in the past and will continue to do so in the future The greenhouse effect is real, this is not up for debate CO2 is a greehouse gas, this is not up for debate Our species has emitted a metric **** ton of CO2 in the last 200 years, this is a fact and not up for debate. So you put all those things together and yeah there is a whole lot of overwhelming evidence pointing towards our actions as a species impacting climate.How much? Well that's where the debate comes in, and what's to be done about it? That's the biggest debate that should be happening. The science is pretty straightforward and trying to hand wave it away with arguments like "Well the Earth warms and cools naturally" aren't scientific they're little better than being a flat earther or creationist. Just flies in the face of real science. I ♥ you. Aaaaand cue KBF's triple "D" "Deny, Deflect, Denigrate"