Climate change 'is the norm'- Dr Martin Keeley

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 10:39 AM

[QUOTE][B]Climate change 'is the norm'
Viewpoint
By Dr Martin Keeley
Geologist, and a Visiting Professor at University College London [/B]

Even as climate experts and politicians meet in Buenos Aires to mark the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, many sceptical scientists will still be arguing that the international consensus on "global warming" has got it wrong.

Those of us who study the pre-human history of the Earth find the current debate over global warming difficult to fathom. Climate changes - this is what it does.

To expect permanent stability in climate patterns displays a fundamental lack of understanding of the complexity and instability of weather.

If the global climate were not getting warmer, it would be getting cooler; stasis is not an option.

Ice caps either advance or retreat, and thank goodness. Following the last Ice Age, the climate is warming, and sea-level is rising - but well within their historical ranges.

As environments alter, so fauna and flora either adapt or die out; nature is very unsentimental.

But for the now-infamous and discredited "hockey stick" temperature curve for the last millennium, used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to add body to the case for Kyoto, most observers would not have suspended belief over claims that today's weather is the "mostest" "on record".

Time dependent

This expression is simply a lie. We know from the geological (and archaeological) record that weather variations and extremes are the norm.

Such extremes occur gradually and rapidly, and obviously were not human-induced (anthropogenic). How then can they represent a threat greater than that of terrorism, as the UK's chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, maintains, except to minds unwilling to accept the inevitability of planetary change?

On thin ice: "Fauna and flora either adapt or die out"
The factors influencing climate and sea-level change are multiple and complex, whether slow or rapid. I still cannot comprehend how anyone can hope to model even present day phenomena, never mind into the future; we still cannot predict next week's weather with any accuracy.

The real question then is not whether climate and sea level changes are occurring and are good or bad things; they have been occurring naturally for billions of years. Nor is the question whether these changes are actually taking place; a moot point at best, as there are conflicting data, but the question is utterly dependent on the time frame.

Rather, environmentalists ask whether climate change is anthropogenic, and if so, can it be stopped. I have come across no rigorous proof that wasteful human pollution has caused any significant climate change.

The accusation is that the hockey stick-shaped temperature track is built from selective data sets

More details

One would be better off asking the question whether volcanic eruptions alter the weather; there at least we can answer "yes".

The only proof of anthropogenic climate change ever offered, which to my mind is fallacious, is that temperature has increased with Western industrialisation; before industrialisation, the hockey stick would negate the Medieval Climate Optimum and Little Ice Age.

There is a closer correlation between this latest warming and universal suffrage. In science, temporal coincidence between events is no proof of a causal link.

Media 'scare'

So, as we enter the third millennium, we should preoccupy ourselves not with the silly question of whether at outrageous expense we could predictably influence the weather, least of all by focusing on just a single component. Instead, we should consider how to adapt ourselves to the inevitability of natural climate and sea-level change.

The issue thus framed would completely alter the capital expenditure question facing policy makers, away from tinkering with the emissions from the cleaner, industrialised nations (thereby delaying modelled anthropogenic global warming by little more than a decade), and towards more pragmatic solutions.

With further warming, crop production can move to higher latitudes
These might include the abandonment of sub-sea level lands condemned to flooding (including the Netherlands), shifting to Mediterranean crops in northern Europe, the re-cultivation of cold terrains (eg Greenland), and the aggressive reforestation as a microclimate control strategy to rehabilitate dry lands.

As for oil, it will almost certainly be too expensive to use as a mass energy source within 25 years.

Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.

It provides the media with a new scare story, which has been picked up by the focus groups and turned into the new religion, offering us hell if we don't all change our ways. However, believing in anthropogenic global warming is not enough, but that is all it can offer.

The author, Dr Martin Keeley, is Visiting Professor in Petroleum Geology, at University College London, UK.

[/QUOTE]

[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4066189.stm[/url]

Jetdawgg · 01-14-2007, 02:27 PM

Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump.

The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries.

[url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url]

Jetdawgg · 01-14-2007, 02:31 PM

Bush and Blair held private talks on climate change before Christmas, and there is a feeling that the US President will now agree a cap on emissions in the US, meaning that, for the first time, American industry and consumers would be expected to start conserving energy and curbing pollution.

The move will be seen as part of a wider repositioning of the Bush government after its comprehensive defeat in last autumn's mid-term elections.

[url]http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1989997,00.html[/url]

Winstonbiggs · 01-14-2007, 03:15 PM

[QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump.

The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries.

[url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url][/QUOTE]

World economic growth and population growth leads to more energy consumption. Higher prices will lead to more conservation and the increasing viability of alternate fuels.

Why ***** about high oil prices when sustained high oil prices would seem to lead to more conservation and alternative fuel growth both positions you seem to support?

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 03:33 PM

[QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump.

The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries.

[url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url][/QUOTE]

please try and stay on the topic......

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 05:18 PM

Thanks for finding such an unbiased author.

Dr Martin Keeley,

Oil Exploration Consultant
Experience — [B]26 years of varied technical, managerial and commercial experience worldwide, in oil companies (large / small, private / state)[/B] and in consulting (in established practises and sole trader), working & living in N Africa, S America, E Asia, NW Europe;

[B]If you are looking for Investment Opportunities currently being promoted by Dr Martin Keeley, directly and indirectly, in the oil & gas and precious metal/mining sectors, you should click on “Martin Keeley, Wealth Creator and Entrepreneur”;[/B]

[url]http://www.martinkeeley.net/index.htm[/url]

King Ryan · 01-14-2007, 07:21 PM

[QUOTE=cr726]Thanks for finding such an unbiased author.

Dr Martin Keeley,

Oil Exploration Consultant
Experience — [B]26 years of varied technical, managerial and commercial experience worldwide, in oil companies (large / small, private / state)[/B] and in consulting (in established practises and sole trader), working & living in N Africa, S America, E Asia, NW Europe;

[B]If you are looking for Investment Opportunities currently being promoted by Dr Martin Keeley, directly and indirectly, in the oil & gas and precious metal/mining sectors, you should click on “Martin Keeley, Wealth Creator and Entrepreneur”;[/B]

[url]http://www.martinkeeley.net/index.htm[/url][/QUOTE]

clearly that must just be a coincidence :D

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 09:53 PM

Never would CBTNY post something entirely slanted to the right.

[QUOTE=Tanginius]clearly that must just be a coincidence :D[/QUOTE]

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 10:11 PM

[QUOTE=Tanginius]clearly that must just be a coincidence :D[/QUOTE]

the difference between this and the leftist drivel posted is this guy brings evidence of climate history over the centuries...not just what's gone on the past six year...but we know what happened yesterday is all that matters... :rolleyes:

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 10:13 PM

This guy has been making money in the oil business for over 25 years and he has no conflict in interest?

You truly do not care about anyone's opinion unless it agrees with yours. Your thread is BS and you still will not admit it.

[QUOTE=Come Back to NY]the difference between this and the leftist drivel posted is this guy brings evidence of climate history over the centuries...not just what's gone on the past six year...but we know what happened yesterday is all that matters... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 10:33 PM

yes...yet another BS thread that I started which you just can't stay away from....

[QUOTE=cr726]This guy has been making money in the oil business for over 25 years and he has no conflict in interest?

You truly do not care about anyone's opinion unless it agrees with yours. Your thread is BS and you still will not admit it.[/QUOTE]

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 10:44 PM

You are right this is a BS thread.

[QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yes...yet another BS thread that I started which you just can't stay away from....[/QUOTE]

CanadaSteve · 01-14-2007, 10:50 PM

Okay....again, to think that a society that has consumed more products in fifty years than the last ten thousand years has "no" affect on the speeding up of climate changes, well is niave at best.

Oh, did I mention that Dr. Martin Keeley works as an oil exploration consultant, and is funded by big business?

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 10:55 PM

We all must accept that CBTNY is perfect.
He may call everyone out, but do not ever think about calling him out on his biased BS.

[QUOTE=CanadaSteve]Okay....again, to think that a society that has consumed more products in fifty years than the last ten thousand years has "no" affect on the speeding up of climate changes, well is niave at best.

Oh, did I mention that Dr. Martin Keeley works as an oil exploration consultant, and is funded by big business?[/QUOTE]

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 10:58 PM

yet you've posted in it more than anyone else...what a dumbazz...

[QUOTE=cr726]You are right this is a BS thread.[/QUOTE]

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 11:01 PM

Thanks for keeping track and being accurate on at least one thing.

[QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yet you've posted in it more than anyone else...what a dumbazz...[/QUOTE]

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 11:04 PM

yet another post in this "BS thread"...

[QUOTE=cr726]Thanks for keeping track and being accurate on at least one thing.[/QUOTE]

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 11:11 PM

Post or thread? Your thread and my posts in your BS thread?

[QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yet another post in this "BS thread"...[/QUOTE]

Come Back to NY · 01-14-2007, 11:14 PM

it's comical you continue to post in a thread you claim is "BS".....you truly are brain dead...

[QUOTE=cr726]Post or thread? Your thread and my posts in your BS thread?[/QUOTE]

cr726 · 01-14-2007, 11:17 PM

Oh man. Boy do I feel stupid. Man you are brilliant. Ok. Now do you want at least admit your article is absolute crap or would you like to keep on talking about my posts? Keep off the subject. Is this how you feel better about yourself?

[QUOTE=Come Back to NY]you truly are brain dead...it's comical you continue to post in a thread you claim is "BS".....[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 10:39 AM	#1
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	Climate change 'is the norm'- Dr Martin Keeley [QUOTE][B]Climate change 'is the norm' Viewpoint By Dr Martin Keeley Geologist, and a Visiting Professor at University College London [/B] Even as climate experts and politicians meet in Buenos Aires to mark the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, many sceptical scientists will still be arguing that the international consensus on "global warming" has got it wrong. Those of us who study the pre-human history of the Earth find the current debate over global warming difficult to fathom. Climate changes - this is what it does. To expect permanent stability in climate patterns displays a fundamental lack of understanding of the complexity and instability of weather. If the global climate were not getting warmer, it would be getting cooler; stasis is not an option. Ice caps either advance or retreat, and thank goodness. Following the last Ice Age, the climate is warming, and sea-level is rising - but well within their historical ranges. As environments alter, so fauna and flora either adapt or die out; nature is very unsentimental. But for the now-infamous and discredited "hockey stick" temperature curve for the last millennium, used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to add body to the case for Kyoto, most observers would not have suspended belief over claims that today's weather is the "mostest" "on record". Time dependent This expression is simply a lie. We know from the geological (and archaeological) record that weather variations and extremes are the norm. Such extremes occur gradually and rapidly, and obviously were not human-induced (anthropogenic). How then can they represent a threat greater than that of terrorism, as the UK's chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, maintains, except to minds unwilling to accept the inevitability of planetary change? On thin ice: "Fauna and flora either adapt or die out" The factors influencing climate and sea-level change are multiple and complex, whether slow or rapid. I still cannot comprehend how anyone can hope to model even present day phenomena, never mind into the future; we still cannot predict next week's weather with any accuracy. The real question then is not whether climate and sea level changes are occurring and are good or bad things; they have been occurring naturally for billions of years. Nor is the question whether these changes are actually taking place; a moot point at best, as there are conflicting data, but the question is utterly dependent on the time frame. Rather, environmentalists ask whether climate change is anthropogenic, and if so, can it be stopped. I have come across no rigorous proof that wasteful human pollution has caused any significant climate change. The accusation is that the hockey stick-shaped temperature track is built from selective data sets More details One would be better off asking the question whether volcanic eruptions alter the weather; there at least we can answer "yes". The only proof of anthropogenic climate change ever offered, which to my mind is fallacious, is that temperature has increased with Western industrialisation; before industrialisation, the hockey stick would negate the Medieval Climate Optimum and Little Ice Age. There is a closer correlation between this latest warming and universal suffrage. In science, temporal coincidence between events is no proof of a causal link. Media 'scare' So, as we enter the third millennium, we should preoccupy ourselves not with the silly question of whether at outrageous expense we could predictably influence the weather, least of all by focusing on just a single component. Instead, we should consider how to adapt ourselves to the inevitability of natural climate and sea-level change. The issue thus framed would completely alter the capital expenditure question facing policy makers, away from tinkering with the emissions from the cleaner, industrialised nations (thereby delaying modelled anthropogenic global warming by little more than a decade), and towards more pragmatic solutions. With further warming, crop production can move to higher latitudes These might include the abandonment of sub-sea level lands condemned to flooding (including the Netherlands), shifting to Mediterranean crops in northern Europe, the re-cultivation of cold terrains (eg Greenland), and the aggressive reforestation as a microclimate control strategy to rehabilitate dry lands. As for oil, it will almost certainly be too expensive to use as a mass energy source within 25 years. Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science. It provides the media with a new scare story, which has been picked up by the focus groups and turned into the new religion, offering us hell if we don't all change our ways. However, believing in anthropogenic global warming is not enough, but that is all it can offer. The author, Dr Martin Keeley, is Visiting Professor in Petroleum Geology, at University College London, UK. [/QUOTE] [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4066189.stm[/url]

01-14-2007, 02:27 PM	#2
Jetdawgg All Pro Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 6,693	The bill creates a Strategic Renewable Energy Reserve Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump. The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries. [url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url]

01-14-2007, 02:31 PM	#3
Jetdawgg All Pro Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 6,693	Bush set for climate change U-turn Bush and Blair held private talks on climate change before Christmas, and there is a feeling that the US President will now agree a cap on emissions in the US, meaning that, for the first time, American industry and consumers would be expected to start conserving energy and curbing pollution. The move will be seen as part of a wider repositioning of the Bush government after its comprehensive defeat in last autumn's mid-term elections. [url]http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1989997,00.html[/url]

01-14-2007, 05:18 PM	#6
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Thanks for finding such an unbiased author. Dr Martin Keeley, Oil Exploration Consultant Experience — [B]26 years of varied technical, managerial and commercial experience worldwide, in oil companies (large / small, private / state)[/B] and in consulting (in established practises and sole trader), working & living in N Africa, S America, E Asia, NW Europe; [B]If you are looking for Investment Opportunities currently being promoted by Dr Martin Keeley, directly and indirectly, in the oil & gas and precious metal/mining sectors, you should click on “Martin Keeley, Wealth Creator and Entrepreneur”;[/B] [url]http://www.martinkeeley.net/index.htm[/url] Last edited by cr726; 01-14-2007 at 05:45 PM.

01-14-2007, 10:13 PM	#10
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	This guy has been making money in the oil business for over 25 years and he has no conflict in interest? You truly do not care about anyone's opinion unless it agrees with yours. Your thread is BS and you still will not admit it. [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]the difference between this and the leftist drivel posted is this guy brings evidence of climate history over the centuries...not just what's gone on the past six year...but we know what happened yesterday is all that matters... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] Last edited by cr726; 01-14-2007 at 10:16 PM.

01-14-2007, 03:15 PM	#4
Winstonbiggs Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 12,940	[QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump. The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries. [url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url][/QUOTE] World economic growth and population growth leads to more energy consumption. Higher prices will lead to more conservation and the increasing viability of alternate fuels. Why ***** about high oil prices when sustained high oil prices would seem to lead to more conservation and alternative fuel growth both positions you seem to support?

01-14-2007, 03:33 PM	#5
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	[QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil, Pelosi says. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices have topped $3 per gallon at the pump. The United States now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent, and the country is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries. [url]http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2007/2007-01-12-09.asp[/url][/QUOTE] please try and stay on the topic......

01-14-2007, 07:21 PM	#7
King Ryan take a guess Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Montville, NJ Posts: 5,473	[QUOTE=cr726]Thanks for finding such an unbiased author. Dr Martin Keeley, Oil Exploration Consultant Experience — [B]26 years of varied technical, managerial and commercial experience worldwide, in oil companies (large / small, private / state)[/B] and in consulting (in established practises and sole trader), working & living in N Africa, S America, E Asia, NW Europe; [B]If you are looking for Investment Opportunities currently being promoted by Dr Martin Keeley, directly and indirectly, in the oil & gas and precious metal/mining sectors, you should click on “Martin Keeley, Wealth Creator and Entrepreneur”;[/B] [url]http://www.martinkeeley.net/index.htm[/url][/QUOTE] clearly that must just be a coincidence :D

01-14-2007, 09:53 PM	#8
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Never would CBTNY post something entirely slanted to the right. [QUOTE=Tanginius]clearly that must just be a coincidence :D[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 10:11 PM	#9
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	[QUOTE=Tanginius]clearly that must just be a coincidence :D[/QUOTE] the difference between this and the leftist drivel posted is this guy brings evidence of climate history over the centuries...not just what's gone on the past six year...but we know what happened yesterday is all that matters... :rolleyes:

01-14-2007, 10:33 PM	#11
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	yes...yet another BS thread that I started which you just can't stay away from.... [QUOTE=cr726]This guy has been making money in the oil business for over 25 years and he has no conflict in interest? You truly do not care about anyone's opinion unless it agrees with yours. Your thread is BS and you still will not admit it.[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 10:44 PM	#12
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	You are right this is a BS thread. [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yes...yet another BS thread that I started which you just can't stay away from....[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 10:50 PM	#13
CanadaSteve Liked the draft picks....meat and potatoes. All Pro Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 6,514	Okay....again, to think that a society that has consumed more products in fifty years than the last ten thousand years has "no" affect on the speeding up of climate changes, well is niave at best. Oh, did I mention that Dr. Martin Keeley works as an oil exploration consultant, and is funded by big business?

01-14-2007, 10:55 PM	#14
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	We all must accept that CBTNY is perfect. He may call everyone out, but do not ever think about calling him out on his biased BS. [QUOTE=CanadaSteve]Okay....again, to think that a society that has consumed more products in fifty years than the last ten thousand years has "no" affect on the speeding up of climate changes, well is niave at best. Oh, did I mention that Dr. Martin Keeley works as an oil exploration consultant, and is funded by big business?[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 10:58 PM	#15
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	yet you've posted in it more than anyone else...what a dumbazz... [QUOTE=cr726]You are right this is a BS thread.[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 11:01 PM	#16
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Thanks for keeping track and being accurate on at least one thing. [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yet you've posted in it more than anyone else...what a dumbazz...[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 11:04 PM	#17
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	yet another post in this "BS thread"... [QUOTE=cr726]Thanks for keeping track and being accurate on at least one thing.[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 11:11 PM	#18
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Post or thread? Your thread and my posts in your BS thread? [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]yet another post in this "BS thread"...[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 11:14 PM	#19
Come Back to NY Making lotsa $$$ off obama's stupidity... Jets Insider VIP JetsInsider.com Legend Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 31,407	it's comical you continue to post in a thread you claim is "BS".....you truly are brain dead... [QUOTE=cr726]Post or thread? Your thread and my posts in your BS thread?[/QUOTE]

01-14-2007, 11:17 PM	#20
cr726 Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,329	Oh man. Boy do I feel stupid. Man you are brilliant. Ok. Now do you want at least admit your article is absolute crap or would you like to keep on talking about my posts? Keep off the subject. Is this how you feel better about yourself? [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]you truly are brain dead...it's comical you continue to post in a thread you claim is "BS".....[/QUOTE]