World Waking Up. Climate Deniers Scream Foul

April 12, 2016


The climate denial think tank that has been subpoenaed – Competitive Enterprise Institute – crying foul. Right wing media spinning furiously.

Related to the #ExxonKnew case.  Now that internal documents are available confirming that #Exxonknew climate change was real and caused by us – in the late 70s and certainly in the early 80’s, when executives were given a sober, in retrospective – eerily accurate – briefing by senior scientists. (see my Exxon video below)

For reference, CEI was behind the infamous “Co2 is Life” commercial.(below)

Media Matters:

Contributors at USA Today and Bloomberg View are echoing false attacks on attorneys general who are investigating whether oil companies deceived the public on climate change, and grossly misrepresenting why the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands has subpoenaed records from an oil industry-funded think tank as part of his investigation.

A coalition of attorneys general has committed to holding fossil fuel companies including Exxon accountable if they obfuscated climate change research in order to protect their financial interests. This follows reports from InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times showing that Exxon’s own scientists confirmed by the early 1980s that fossil fuel pollution was causing climate change, yet Exxon funded organizations that helped manufacture doubt about the causes of climate change for decades afterwards. One of the climate denial organizations that Exxon funded was the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), and U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker is now subpoenaing CEI for “records of the group’s donors and activities involving climate policy,” as InsideClimate News reported. CEI said it “will vigorously fight to quash this subpoena,” and called it “an affront to our First Amendment rights of free speech and association.”

Now, contributors at USA Today and Bloomberg View are defending CEI and Exxon by misrepresenting Exxon’s alleged wrongdoing. Bloomberg View’s Megan McArdle authored a column on April 8 headlined, “Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming,” in which she claimed the attorneys general are trying to “shut down dissenters” and criminalize “advocating for policies that the attorneys general disagreed with.” Similarly, USA Today contributor Glenn Reynolds proclaimed in an April 11 column that the attorneys general investigations look like “a concerted scheme to restrict the First Amendment free speech rights of people they don’t agree with,” and that their goal is to “treat disagreement as something more or less criminal.”

In casting the issue as a matter of “free speech,” both McArdle and Reynolds ignored the real reason the attorneys general have launched investigations into Exxon and subpoenaed records from CEI. As InsideClimate News explained, despite Exxon’s “emerging understanding of climate change science in the 1970s,” the oil giant subsequently worked to “undermine the scientific consensus, in part by financing research organizations including CEI.” InsideClimate News added:

CEI is one of several organizations that have been repeatedly named over the years by those who have criticized Exxon and other fossil fuel companies for financing the climate denial work of third parties. After the Royal Society of the United Kingdom castigated Exxon in 2006 for giving money to groups misrepresenting climate science, Exxon said it had stopped financing the CEI.

Additionally, the Climate Investigations Center (CIC) uncovered that the year after CEI received $270,000 from Exxon for “Global Climate Change,” “Global Climate Change Outreach,” and “General Operating Support,” CEI released a climate science-denying TV commercial with the tag line: “Carbon Dioxide: They Call it Pollution, We Call it Life.” CIC stated that the commercial “caused such an outcry, we believe it triggered ExxonMobil to cut funding to CEI altogether.”

Bloomberg View’s McArdle warned that the attorneys general investigations could set a bad “precedent” that would “eventually be used against” the “enemies of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and ExxonMobil.” But that has already happened: climate science denier and then-Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli was found by the Virginia Supreme Court to have overstepped his authority by demanding that the University of Virginia provide emails and other documents from climate scientist Michael Mann. Identical documents were sought by the American Tradition Institute, whose senior director of litigation, Chris Horner, was also a senior fellow at CEI.

McArdle did mention in her column that her husband Peter Suderman had “briefly worked for CEI as a junior employee.” While she was at it, she could have disclosed that Suderman currently works for Reason magazine, and that the Reason Foundation has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Exxon.

NPR (2006):

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, which gets some of its funding from such companies as ExxonMobil, has released a counterstrike to Al Gore’s new documentary An Inconvenient Truth. While I haven’t seen the film, from the press it’s getting, it’s a jeremiad against global warming.

CEI takes issue with that and has released two TV ads, that — get this — promote CO2. Now, a vast majority of scientists agree that man-made pollutants, especially CO2, are definitely causing an increase in the Earth’s temperature. How fast and how much is open to debate, but pretty much everyone agrees, this is probably not a good thing.

CEI’s ads sound like something that Saturday Night Live (which Gore recently hosted) might come up with. Their tag line about CO2, “They call it pollution. We call it life.”

There are some things you just can’t make up.

Here – one of the most poorly reported stories of any year.


26 Responses to “World Waking Up. Climate Deniers Scream Foul”

  1. renewableguy Says:

    I comment on FOS (Friends of Science) which is out of Canada confronting their information. I must of used too strong of language for them by saying Exxon lied. I was cut off from commenting on that. There was a response from the blogger chastising me for my comment.

    I’m getting the impression the denial blogosphere can’t take the open forum anymore and resort to leveling the field for their weak commenters.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      You say “I’m getting the impression the denial blogosphere can’t take the open forum anymore and resort to leveling the field for their weak commenters”?

      The old cliche “truer words were never spoken” applies to that—-your “impression” is right on the money. FOS is a rather extreme site—I’ve never bothered to comment there because I think I’d last about 30 seconds. I did manage to last for a couple of days on WUWT before that moron Watts banned me for beating up on him and his “weak commenters”.

      Another cliche is that if you aren’t able to score any runs in the game because your facts and skills are weak, you just take your bat and ball and go home, and you actually do that by banning the team that is beating you. The morons at FOS and WUWT can then admire themselves in the mirror without having us replying “definitely not you” to the query “who’s the smartest of them all?”.

    • @renewableguy: Not knowing which place you commented at, it is my educated guess that the FoS people cut you out for making assertions you have no hope of backing up. It isn’t enough to call someone a liar, you have to fully detail that for the folks who have no clue what instances you are referring to. Witness all the comments our friend and commenter “d.o.g.” hurls about liars, while constantly failing to detail specifically what the lies are. (fun how all can see the way I live rent-free in “d.o.g.”‘s mind even today)

      Believe what you want to believe about “the denial blogosphere can’t take the open forum”, but it is actually AGW believers who can’t handle it. Why do you suppose AGW scientist critics constantly challenge IPCC scientists to debate in an open forum, and why do you suppose you see things like Gavin Schmidt refusing to appear at the same desk when Roy Spencer was on the same show? And why do you suppose I was banned from commenting at Christopher Keating’s “Dialogues On Global Warming” site? It wasn’t because I hurled worthless “Greenpeace lied”-style statements, it was because he and his commenters could not handle my REPEATED challenges to provide specific evidence proving skeptic climate scientists are in a pay-for-performance arrangement with industry or ‘dark money’ people ( )

      To his credit, Peter Sinclair hasn’t elected to ban me from commenting. How many of you have pleaded with him to do so? Then ask yourselves if your plea was based on me using profanity, or making assertions having nothing to back them up? Or is it because you can’t meet my challenges, and it is a travesty you can’t?

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Having spent many years in education and being exposed to measures of “intelligence”, I feel safe in offering the opinion that Russell’s IQ is perhaps a bit higher than the deniers cited in that report. I would estimate high 80’s to low 90’s, which puts Russell in the “low normal” range—dumber than ~75-80% of the population. Smart enough to gather up and sling BS, but not smart enough to understand that those of us with above-average intelligence that recognize it’s BS consider him a fool.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Russell begins his comment with some irony and humor—the idea that he is capable of making “educated guesses” about anything to do with climate change or science in general. Good one, Russell—-LOL—-yes, you DO have to be minimally EDUCATED to make educated guesses, and Russell has admitted that he is not.

        Since I am actually the one living rent-free in Russell’s mind, he again returns to his tired old “prove it” bullshit (which is in the masthead of that steaming pile of s**t website of his—the GobofSpit.files (don’t go there unless you want to lower your IQ).

        “Believe what you want to believe about “the denial blogosphere can’t take the open forum”, says Russell? As if we needed his permission.

        “Why do you suppose AGW scientist critics constantly challenge IPCC scientists to debate in an open forum, and why do you suppose you see things like Gavin Schmidt refusing to appear at the same desk when Roy Spencer was on the same show?” asks Russell? Because the 99.99% of climate scientists who accept AGW do NOT want to provide any forum to the liars who would obfuscate the truth. Preachers do not offer the pulpit to the devil at church services either.

        “And why do you suppose I was banned from commenting at Christopher Keating’s “Dialogues On Global Warming” site?”, asks Russell? It’s because you mindlessly kept singing your tired and were labelled a “harasser”. Keating simply got tired of you crapping up his site.

        Peter Sinclair hasn’t elected to ban you from commenting on Crock because you are a perfect bad example—-just smart enough to string some BS together but not smart enough to make any real sense. Peter is in effect throwing “Russell Cook flavored” bones to the rest of us DOGS to gnaw on. Keeps us from chewing on the furniture.

        Russell again ends with what he thinks is a devastating blast. “Or is it because you can’t meet my challenges, and it is a travesty you can’t?”, he states. A malapropism that could have come from the mouth of Dubya (or Omno). LOL. Keep it coming, Russell—you are much more fun than Tom Bates, Adrian Vance, Lorne50, and the other denier morons who visit here. You provide wonderful anti-Alzheimer’s therapy for us DOGs.

      • Russel, This “AGW believer” enjoys and welcomes your comments.

      • Lionel Smith Says:

        To his credit, Peter Sinclair hasn’t elected to ban me from commenting.

        I wonder if Peter is just giving you enough rope. Each time you post you oblige by hanging yourself. It takes a special kind of delusion to do that with so much consistency.

        • greenman3610 Says:

          I can always point to Russell in case anyone doubts what I say about climate deniers.
          Well, Russell and Sara Palin.

          Ok, Trump. And Cruz…

          • dumboldguy Says:

            And you can point to a whole bunch of others also, the difference being that you usually have to chase them all down a bit and get them to stand still in order to set them up as targets.

            Russell, on the other hand, struts right out front here on Crock, wearing his Demented Rooster suit (and self-satisfied moronic expression) and loudly crows about how smart he is, all the while proving “what you say about climate deniers”. He does it time after time after time—–just like he said “prove it” 27 times in one comment. It doesn’t get any easier than that—-it’s like the old idiom—–“shooting fish in a barrel”. That’s our boy!

          • @greenman3610 Don’t be coy about it, devote an entire blog post to me and don’t mince words about what you can “say” about me. But I’d love to hear precisely how you can use me as some kind of example. Gun lover? Palin worshiper? Ignoramus? Denier? Racist? Religious zealot? Two words: prove it. When you can’t deliver on those beliefs, what is your fallback position?

            My suggestion: step back and take a hard look at what you fellows do. I challenge how you prove skeptics lie, and all you do is hurl names and unsupportable opinions. Ask yourselves why it wouldn’t be more effective to gather up 10, 20, 100 lies straight out of my blog posts, dissect them 6 ways to Sunday, and then roll out the pièce de résistance, evidence where I’m caught taking orders from handlers who pay me to do so.

            I submit an elemental answer: you guys got nothing on what I detail, and you already know you can’t prove I’m paid/instructed/orchestrated to do what I do.

            That eats you-all alive, doesn’t it?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Uh, Russell? Have you again forgotten that @greenman3610 is none other than your ever-patient host on Crock, Peter Sinclair? I hope so, because if you sent this message knowing who @greenman3610 is, you may be in some trouble.

            It is very presumptuous of you to make such demands on your host and tell him what to write on his blog. You may be wearing out your welcome. Ask Dave Burton what happens to those who behave badly here.

            (PS You were asking us to cite some evidence of you being delusional? This entire message qualifies. Anyone who believes that Heartland pays you and does NOT expect you to sling despicable denier BS in return is delusional also.)

        • Indulge this entire audience: SPECIFICALLY what am I delusional about? Where have I ever “denied climate change”? What particular details within my collection of GelbspanFiles blog posts and online articles (including another coming out in a day or three) are dead wrong bits of pure delusion.

          I keep lofting those challenges at you guys and the collective lot of you, Peter Sinclair included, literally do not even take a swing at them. Point me and the Atttorneys General straight to the evidence proving skeptic climate scientists are in a pay-for-performance arrangement with industry people. Surely you have this evidence at your disposal …………. or is it actually only something you believe exists somewhere.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Please note that Russell attempts to sound rational, logical, and reasonable in this comment, but he is STILL playing his “hack the thumbs” game, which I likened to an infant smearing feces on the wall just because he wants to and he can.

            He is awarding himself two “ups” from the get go on his comments, and adding to the “downs” that other commenters receive every time he visits. I feel safe in saying that there is NO ONE that visits Crock that would EVER give Russell a thumbs up for ANYTHING he has ever posted here—if there is someone out there who did so, I ask them to identify themselves in a full comment showing their specific agreement with Russell. (not you Master Bates).

            Russell is simply OUT OF CONTROL if he cannot subdue that hacking impulse. Perhaps he thinks it’s funny? OK—-Ha-Ha-Ha, Russell. Now grow up.

            Russell continues with his one-note “prove it” song, demanding of us that we provide SPECIFICS and actual physical EVIDENCE that he is the lying scumbag paid whore for fossil fuels that we can all recognize. I have said many times, OPEN GobofSpitfiles to outside comments and I will spend an hour a day with you. You won’t do it and are no better than Morano refusing the $20,000 bet.

            As far as crapping up Crock dealing with Russell, we spend enough time doing that. All the circumstantial evidence that Russell has provided us himself is enough for me to vote GUILTY as charged on all counts. Russell keeps demanding PROOF because he doesn’t understand that MANY folks have been convicted of murder in this country on the weight of circumstantial evidence even when there wasn’t a body in evidence, and what we have is more than enough to convict him.

            As for what Russell is SPECIFICALLY delusional about, let’s start with his 40 “How Green I Am” items. I am close to 76 years old, Russell, and I have NEVER found a usable pencil, pen, or paper clip in a parking lot—any pen or pencil had been squashed by vehicles, and any paper clips were rusty. You are delusional if you expect us to believe that one. Even more so is your claim that you “don’t run the water for your Shower / hair washing straight down the drain when I warm it up, I save it and pour it in the toilet tank later after flushing”—-I’ve already called you on that, but I’ll now say PROVE IT (but not 27 times). Tell us exactly how you collect and save that shower water, how you transfer it to the toilet, and what the drill is for using it to flush. Do you stand in a kiddy pool? A barrel? Does a rubber ducky live there with you? Quack!

  2. dumboldguy Says:

    Yes, CO2 is our BEST friend—-or so the whores for fossil fuels would like you to believe. The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI), a subsidiary of Heartland that is run by junior pimp Craig Idso, has produced a whole pamphlet on the “benefits” of C02, 55 pf them to be exact—-it’s a condensation of a whole freakin’ BOOK that he wrote, but is only 14 pages long and loads of laughs—-#21 is my favorite.


    Speaking of SPPI, Heartland, Exxon, et al, the ever-diligent desmogblog has much to say. There are wide trails everywhere in the woods for the AG’s to follow—-the dumb beasts of the denier world have not been very careful about covering their tracks (as in the Fred Singer Merchants of Doubt emails that are going to take down our friend Russell Cook).

    Yes, truer words than “some things you just can’t make up” were never spoken, and CEI’s stuff DOES sound like it came from SNL or the pages of The Onion. It would be funny if the situation weren’t so serious.

    Keep up your reporting on “one of the most poorly reported stories of any year”. Sooner or later the great unwashed masses have GOT to notice what’s going on.

    • “… the ever-diligent desmogblog has much to say. There are wide trails everywhere in the woods for the AG’s to follow—-the dumb beasts of the denier world have not been very careful about covering their tracks (as in the Fred Singer Merchants of Doubt emails that are going to take down our friend Russell Cook)”

      First, by all means, PLEASE keep right on pointing to Desmog. Trust me on this.

      Second, consider how AGWers essentially own the domain of false premise assertions (based on beliefs rather than facts) and psychological projection. It just blows my mind how you fellers continue believing skeptics have damaging items to bury when it is your dear leaders who are the ones leaving wide trails to follow when they can’t keep their mouths shut about particular details and when they can’t keep their ducks lined up in a row.

      “… like it came from SNL …” Oh, yeh. And who was it spreading around that narrow, repeated-in-a-suspect-way talking point in 2006? Keep right on pointing to stuff like that, ignore that rapidly lowering horizon in front of you.

      • Poor old Russell you have some serious problems coming up, possibly involving blunted pitchforks with barbs

        Margaret Davidson, NOAA’s senior advisor for coastal inundation and resilience science and services, and Michael Angelina, executive director of the Academy of Risk Management and Insurance, offered their take on climate change data in a conference session titled “Environmental Intelligence: Quantifying the Risks of Climate Change.”

        RIMS16_conference logoDavidson said recent data that has been collected but has yet to be made official indicates sea levels could rise by roughly 3 meters by 2050-2060, far higher and quicker than current projections. Until now most projections have warned of seal level rise of up to 4 feet by 2100.

        These new findings will likely be released in the latest sets of reports on climate change due out in the next few years.

        “The latest field data out of West Antarctic is kind of an OMG thing,” she said.

        Davidson’s purpose was to talk about how NOAA is sharing information with the insurance community and the public, and to explain how data on climate change is being collected.

        She explained that reports like those from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Climate Assessment, which come out roughly every five years, are going on old data.

        By the time the scientists compiling those reports get the data it’s roughly two years old, because it took those gathering the data that long to collect it. It takes authors of the reports a few years to compile them.

        “By the time we get out the report, it’s actually synthesizing data from about a decade ago,” she said.

        Do note the Greenland melt, Arctic melt and the item that stands out at the moment for the average person, the upcoming Crystal Voyager cruise. The life they aspire to highlighting AGW

        • Now Russell run off to your masters and warn them they will now have to come up with some explanations or excuses and flim flam, lets guess, cosmic rays, volcanic action, solar spasm, fairies, librals with blow torches, dark energy, alien invasion, Chinese/Russian/ISIS/Soros weather manipulation

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Here’s Russell, saying “First, by all means, PLEASE keep right on pointing to Desmog. Trust me on this”.

        A rather childish tactic, like saying “Keep hitting me, I like it” in order to get someone to stop beating your brains out. Might work on a sim-witted second-grader, Russell, but your feeble attempt here at reverse psychology only proves the fact that you and all the other deniers are scared s**tless by desmogblog’s truth-telling.

        Listen up, all. In case you aren’t aware, googling almost ANYTHING, but particularly names, in conjunction with “desmogblog” will be your quickest route to the truth about climate deniers. Many links to follow will be given for most.

        Googling “Russell Cook desmogblog” yields six+ full screens of damning info (including a mug shot of Russell wearing the famous baseball cap and a link to the video where Russell says he “has nothing to do with science” and that “Heartland must be scraping the bottom of the barrel and dragging him in off the street” to put him up on the stage).

        The rest of this is just more maundering and obfuscatory BS—not worth responding to.

  3. dumboldguy Says:

    Talking about Id(iot)so’s “55 Benefits of CO2” reminded me of something that our good friend Russell Cook wrote and posted. It’s a list of forty “reasons” that show how “green” Russell is, and it’s a laugh riot. Maybe Heartland had all its paid-by-fossil-fuel whores do an exercise like this—coming up with massive lists of bullshit “proofs” of something. I can see why they printed Idso’s—-they pay him BIG bucks and there is at least some pseudoscience in the “55” that will play to the ignorant. Russell’s screed, on the other hand, must have been an embarrassment even to his senile old Uncle Fred Singer, and therefore it got buried. Russell’s deluded maunderings begin:

    “How Green I Am. Any time I ask tough questions about global warming science, enviro-activists label me a right-wing nut who feels no obligation to care for the planet. Is it any wonder why I burst into laughter when they do that?”

    Ignoring the fact that Russell has admitted that he knows no science of ANY kind, and is therefore unqualified to ask ANY questions about global warming, never mind tough ones, let’s all “burst into laughter” while looking at some highlights from Russell’s “Forty”. Commentary added in parens .

    1). Refrigerator set at warmest tolerable setting. (And you know you’ve overdone it when you get food poisoning?)
    9). Excess napkins in my fast-food purchases are saved and used thoroughly later. Paper towels are thoroughly used up for all manner of cleaning before being discarded. (The Charmin folks won’t like that—–cuts into their “bottom” line)
    14) .I get ‘maximum use’ out of adhesive-backed stickers before I throw them out by using them to pick up fuzz from my carpet (Perhaps Russell should instead use them to remove the fuzz from his brain?)
    15. Perfectly good, clean items “harvested” from my apartment complex’s dumpsters for my own re-use, eBay sale, or donation to thrift stores. (Yep, Russell is one of the “crazy old guys” who dumpster dive—not surprising)
    16). I have not bought a pen, pencil or box of paper clips in recent memory, such stationary items are good discarded items I find in parking lots. (Yep, it’s good that so many of us are throwing boxes of paper clips in parking lots for Russell to find).
    17). Calendars from prior years saved over a long span of time re-used when applicable to the current year. e.g., 2003 identical to 2014 (Yes, and while waiting for them to “come around”, one can use the stack as a footstool).
    32). No continuous running water for tooth brushing, and I don’t run the water for my Shower / hair washing straight down the drain when I warm it up, I save it and pour it in the toilet tank later after flushing. I’m probably saving over 700 gallons of water per year doing that. (Hmmmm—-does Russell stand in a kiddie pool while showering? Has he shut off the water to the toilet so that he can use the “transfer” water? Most importantly, how does he coordinate his showers with his flushing “needs”?—-seems like there’d be supply-demand imbalances there.)
    38). My car, circa 1986, is well maintained, has exhaust emissions lower than the state standard. I have no intention of buying a new car, ever. (Not ever? Your 30 year old car is immortal?)

    And my favorite:
    36) .Work at home rather than drive to work (If Russell could find and hold an actual job in the fields he trained in, I’m sure he would drive his 1986 car “to work”. Since he can’t, he instead writes denier bullshit for a living AT HOME, and he wants us to think that’s commendable? LOL)

    (PS Full disclosure here—-Russell’s #10. is “Bars of hand soap are used until they become paper-thin slivers, at which point I mash them into new bars”. I will admit that I do something a bit like that, in that I use Irish Spring bar soap in my shower, and the bars are the soft side when wet and they’re curved, so it’s easy to just press the old bar onto the new).

    • Luv it, living rent-free in “d.o.g.”‘s mind. The man could have linked straight to my list ( ), but is evidently afraid to for fear that y’all might go to the root of the web site, namely where there might be things that start to make y’all wonder about just how sound the ‘industry-corrupted skeptic climate scientists’ accusation is. Can’t have that, can we?

      Notice how “d.o.g.” doesn’t actually ever dispute the greenness of my activities? Notice how he feels compelled to distort what I say, e.g. “throwing boxes of paper clips”. Then notice how he resorts to outright profanity (which would get him banned in a heartbeat at other site’s comment sections) combined with an unsupportable in his last “favorite” bit. Ask the man where in any of my online pieces that I’ve stated a denial of climate change, and ask him to describe in detail exactly WHAT within my online pieces is – to put it politely – false ………………. and he will be unable to deliver on both points.

      Now, try posing that same pair of questions to Gore, Oreskes and Gelbspan without identifying who you are or what you believe. All three would label you as a heretic shill working for the denier industry. They would call YOU that rather than provide you with straight-up answers you could use to fight off guys like me.

      There’s your clue about something rotten in the world of AGW, Sherlocks.

      • Russel, A friendly hint. Be less obvious about gaming the thumbs up/down feature

        • dumboldguy Says:

          You waste your time trying to get Russell to behave as a rational adult. He is neither adult not rational in his hacking of the WordPress thumbs (just as he isn’t in his comments on Crock).

          If the hacking process he describes is the one he really uses, Russell is logging off, going into his browser and deleting cookies, and logging back on for EACH thumbs up he awards himself (or for each “down” he lays on the rest of us). The amount of time that takes and the sickness it demonstrates is mind-boggling—-Russell needs serious help with his mental issues. Russell has been caught red-handed, has even explained how he hacks the thumbs feature, and STILL does it even though we all know his game. Perhaps he’s hoping that he can influence the casual Crock visitor somehow—make them think that someone here agrees with him—-a small straw for him to grasp.

          Russell is like a spoiled child saying “nobody tells ME what to do—-if I want to smear my feces on the wall, I will do it”. Our cross to bear, I guess.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        It’s fun to watch Russell get all “frantic” and chase his tail in circles when he doubles down on his bad bets rather than folding his cards and going away until the next game. He never learns (and demonstrates the validity of Einstein’s definition of insanity).

        Here he is, frantically trying to get someone (ANYONE) here to go to GobofSpitfiles and up his hit count. I have told all that I will go there so you don’t have to—-my many years in the schools has given me quite a bit of immunity to the likes of Russell’s BS. I edited Russell’s list down to save you all time—-anyone who wants to go to his site and read the whole thing (and risk brain damage) will find the the full list of 40 is even MORE damaging to Russell than my condensed version. Russell brags about his supposed “greenness”, but all the list proves is that Russell is one sick puppy—-a liar, OCD, delusional, Dunning-Kruger, mild NPD—-a psychologist’s dream.

        He feebly plays word games about boxes of paper clips, talks about “outright profanity” (when he should be using “vulgarity” or perhaps “obscenity” instead), talks about “unsupportables”, and best of all, DENIES that he is a climate change denier. All in ONE demented paragraph!!!!

        He closes with some wild-eyed, drool-running-down-his-chin BS that even Omno couldn’t figure out. I won’t even try. LMAO!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: