Why are plants green?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by esbo, Jul 20, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,921
    That cracked me up...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Glad to bring a photon or two of sunshine into your day.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,788
    It counts as a container garden, single unit.

    Before I venture an opinion on how it looks, perhaps you could post an image.
    Unless, of course, this might somehow prove compromising....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Oh yes, are the leaves a good, healthy shade of green?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. esbo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    84
    I found your message offensive so I reported you.

    Just to let you know.

    Please don't do it again.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2011
  8. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,921
    I find it offensive that you dismiss all reasonable explanations to your question and avoid giving your explanation even though you claimed you would:

    This was posted more than a month ago.

    Put up or shut up!
     
  9. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    For which I received a warning. As I said to James R it is clear neither of you have a sense of humour.

    You seem to feel it is not offensive to lie repeatedly on the forum, but get upset when someone accurately portrays your character in robust words. Tough. Live with it, or start to behave with some honesty in your posting style.
     
  10. esbo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    84
    Calling me a troll is offensive and against the rules whether I am a troll or not, I will give you an explanation if and when I feel like it, I am under no obligation to give you one.

    You won't find many universities giving free courses so I do not know if I should give away my theory for nothing, none of the shops let me have their stuff for free.

    There is no need for you to attack people in the way you do ie name calling and being generally abusive.

    I have not attacked anyone on here in that manner so I fail to see why you feel the need to. If you expect people to be generous to you then you ought to be more respectful and civil.
     
  11. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,921
    In regards to why plants are green, you said:

    This was posted more than a month ago.

    Put up or shut up!
     
  12. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    I don't believe I called you a troll. I did say you were full of shit. You appear to be, by some definitions, a troll. It is no more offensive to call you a troll than it is to call others 'enthusiastic amateurs', or 'post-graduate researchers'. All are objective terms that describe a persons behaviour, interests, or occupation.

    I'm surprised James R considered a jocular remark about you being 'full of shit' constituted an ad hominem. Certainly the language is crude, but the meaning is as follows: "your statements are inaccurate, your arguments are weak, your point of view is distorted and your grasp of facts is delinquent."

    These are attacks on your views and your ways of expressing them, not on you. To defend yourself against them you have to demonstrate that your statements are accurate, your arguments sound, your point of view viable, and your knowledge of the relevant material well established. So far, you have not done so.

    You clearly stated in an earlier post that you would give an explanation shortly. You have refused to do so subsequently, despite multiple requests and reminders from several members. Therefore your initial statement was a lie.

    You are now weaseling out of that commitment. You say you are under no obligation to give me one. You are, however, under an obligation to honour your commitment to the members of this forum to whom you made the original commitment. Making the excuse that you do not have to tell me is pathetic.

    Then you should not have lied about being ready to post an explanation shortly.

    By the way, universities charge for their courses because they have value, something I doubt is true of your explanation. But you have the option of proving me wrong by dazzling me and the other members and the lurkers with your stunning theory.

    And there is no need for you to lie and to refuse to answer simple questions and neglect to honour commitments that you have made. When I see such actions I believe the case is made: an attack on those actions is wholly appropriate until those actions are stopped and apologies issued.


    Because you are lying and refusing to honour your commitments. Do you think lies should be celebrated and dishonourable behaviour praised?


    I do not expect people to be generous to me. I expect people to be honest and I expect them to apply the principles of the scientific method in a positive manner. If they chose, instead, to lie, to waffle, to refuse to engage in honest debate, then I shall point this out.

    I am respectful to those who deserve respect. I apologise if my utter contempt for fools and charlatans occassionally surfaces.
     
  13. esbo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    84
    Can I just say I am under no obligation to answer my own question.
    I came to the board asking the question, it is for you to answer it not me.
     
  14. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    ***Moderator Note***

    You are, however obliged, under considerations of things like common courtosey, and good faith (to name a couple), to respond to reasonable questions, something which you have fairly consistently failed to do. You have been offered a number of perfectly reasonable and well reasoned responses, and instead of offering an equally reasonable and reasoned response, you have complained that they were too vague and waffly.

    This thread has outlived its usefulness, hence it is now closed.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page