You are less of an ass than the paid "reporter" who got it factually wrong after watching with his own dumb eyes.  These sites have bad writing and worse editing 

Stop being reasonable.  There is no place for that here.

It is actually possible that it is not true (I have no idea if it is or it isn’t). People lie to get money in court - not just women, men too

I miss when you used to write about food and were funny.  Now you are angry and bitter and no fun at all.  You need a vacation.

Now they go to Vegas after one more year of failure, and the NFL forces Mark Davis to sell the team to someone who actually has enough money to make it successful.  

The bigger problem is the ability of the player to get what he wants by violating both his contract and the collective bargaining agreement.  Suspend the player for the rest of the season under these circumstances, and this problem goes away.  

Little Miss Can't Be Wrong!

It only cost him 20 million dollars

Maynard is a tool. And his band is overrated.  He sucks.

Megan isn't going to post a long form whine one more time to say goodbye?  Too bad. 

I read your link.  The fact that you blindly swallow it shows a lack of critical thought.  Your unwillingness to acknowledge the uncertainty of the science or the credibility of the source shows dogmatic and inflexible thinking.

Accepting theory without critical thought I'd Fundamentalism 101, as is branding those who question your conclusions

A single person with a commercial agenda in a sensationalist media source is not reliable.  Such a thing is unknowable.

Clearly, you are too dumb to have a conversation. 

No, it isn’t. There is no consensus that this weather event is due to climate change. In fact, the consensus is that individual weather events should not be looked at as evidence for or against climate change.  But you are clearly too dogmatic to understand nuance

I know.  It is a stupid and childish thing to write in a conversation such as this.

None of what you have said is "science." You are just a fundamentalist swallowing dogma.  

And saying that you “pray to the Gods both old and new" is unbelievably douchey.  Ugh.  Who are these new gods, L Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith?  Come join us in a lovely place I call "reality."

Your subjective impressions from the limited data of your own experience is not terribly useful. The science is more complicated than pointing to a severe storm and saying “climate change.” To do so costs you credibility and is counter-productive. We have 137 years of recorded weather history - less if you are looking…

Ah, yes. Anyone who does not embrace climate change as the explanation for all weather events is branded a denier. Anyone who doesn’t like apocalyptic hysterics and wants to have a reasoned conversation about what to do in a changing world is a denier.