Oh dear, Col Rouge.
"I see a lot of cheap shots, suggesting that those who dare to question the conventional wisdom espoused by the climate zealots of the scientific community and their inquisitorial protagonists are to be publically denigrated with words like “Denier”"...
Such noble sentiments. How can one not feel sympathy for anyone so attuned to the sensitivities of others, so concerned about people being "denigrated". (And 'publically", (sic)).
One can only assume you evil twin brother penned the words:
"Dickie is so involved in “the web of life”, she probably braids her pubic hair."
What a magnificent and focussed contribution to a discussion about alleged anthropomorphic global warming. Yes, it is so clear now, the Rouge must be right.
I have to wonder, do you and your mate Chumley, actually enjoy hurting people?
"This is the point, global warming, no identified reason."
No identified reason?
As I recall from my high school science, back in the seventies, in a chemical reaction no (or very, very little) matter is destroyed.
Burning wood creates an equal amount of ash and gas, basically.
Since I personally have been driving cars and bikes and trucks and tractors for about 37 years now, I estimate very roughly about 70 litres of petrol/diesel a week adds up to about 134 tonnes of atmospheric pollution that I personally have created -just in driving alone.
Multiply that by how many billions of drivers? Now add on coal powered power stations, jumbo jets, trains, ships, home heating, etc, etc, etc...
I don't claim to be a climatologist. I don't know whether converting so much of an underground resource into aerial pollution will cause the temperature to rise.
But how can it possibly be good?
When you drive from the country to the city, that purple haze you encounter, is not actually a 'natural' phenomenon.
Remember?

dickie, "can we now assume". You can assume anything you want, dickie, as you freely do. Can I assume your attempts to appoint yourself facilitator and recruit allies suggests someone with a desire for control, little conviction and loads of defensiveness. Speaking of...

G'day Q&A, for a bloke who interprets a request to substantiate a defamatory statement (and still hasn't) as harassment, I can only guess what you mean by vitriol. If you feel your's isn't facilitating things in this forum, please feel free to leave.

Col, thanks for your curiosity. fungochumley is an anagram of mulcheyfogun. Hope this helps. ;-)

Fungochumley

I have tried to be honest and lucid with you. How you interpret my comments is something you have to deal with, not me.

Elsewhere (when I haven't answered your bait and switch tactic) you respond by casting doubt on whether I have any male genitalia (as if it matters twat).

Further dialogue between us is pointless - let it be.

Q&A - "Elsewhere...you respond by casting doubt on whether I have any male genitalia (as if it matters twat)."

Please tell me choice of last word there was intentional pun. Very funny. Think being tad literal - kahunas is metaphor for courage, in this case of honesty and humility to admit to mistakes. You may have tried but have failed, unless you can tell me how it is possible to be forgetful of something you've never read.

"How you interpret my comments is something you have to deal with, not me." Hard to know what heck you're on about here but I can deal with that.

"Further dilogue between us is pointless..." Repeat, has been no dialogue to further as you say I am in denial.

"...let it be." Again, if you mean let me be, sorry, but no. Sure i could easily, but like Col, I think I've decided not to let continued unsubstantiated defamation go unnoted. I expect will lose all battles here, but will do my bit to continue to fight for right - my "cause" if that's what (ech!) dickie means.