Keanehan Pada Setiap Agen Judi Bola Online Saat Ini – Di kesempatan berikut kami akan membicarakan perihal Artikel Agen Judi Bandar Bola Online yg dapat jadi topic ulasan yg serius menarik, tentunya untuk sejumlah pencinta judi semua tak asing dengan ulasan bandar bola pasti langsung akan terpikirkan perihal bandar darat yg seharusnya yakni bandar judi yg mewah dan kaya. Jadi seorang bandar darat pula sesungguhnya tak enteng, bukan sekedar mesti siaga kepada pihak berwajib karena perjudian yakni perihal yg ilegal mereka harus siaga dengan pemain. Yah benar sekali dengan pemain, karena kini banyak berjalan problem bila sejumlah pemain biasanya tidak bisa membayar hutang lalu melarikan diri bahkan ada juga yg bertindak bunuh diri.

Selepas sejumlah pemain amblas atau meninggal dunia tentu saja hutang konsisten ditanggung jawabkan pihak bandar karena biasanya seorang bandar tak membuka market sendiri, tentu saja ada pihak ke 3 jadi pembiayaan dana atau sumber dana seterusnya bila hutang jadi tanggung jawab bandar lantaran itu pihak bandarlah yg butuh membayar.
Keanehan Yang Muncul Pada Setiap Agen Judi
Bola Online

Tentunya jadi seorang bandarpun punyai ketakutan dan kecemasan yg besar mengenai hal demikian meski banyak pihak bandar jadi pihak yg menakali pemain sampai banyak kelanjutannnya sejumlah pemain jadi trauma dalam membicarakan judi baik yg kemenangannya tak dibayar sampai pihak bandar kabur tentunya membuat stigma perjudian jadi tak bagus. Ditambahkan semenjak munculnya Situs Agen Bandar Bola Online yg kelanjutannnya dapat memainkan permainan bola melalui tak langsung atau cuman melalui satu situs yg dapat dimainkan dengan streaming, sampai tentunya akan tingkatkan ketakutan khusus dalam mainkan perihal perjudian di indonesia ini tentunya untuk buat kepercayaan pada sejumlah agen bandar bola tentunya sedikit sulit karena kerap berlangsungnya berbagai hal yg menyentuh perihal kepercayaan tentunya sulit dihilangkan.

Untuk ketaksamaan dari agen bandar yg terpercaya dan nakal akan tampak pada sejumlah ketaksamaan sebagai berikut ini :
– Agen Bandar judi bola terpercaya biasanya memiliki nama domain yg tentunya demikian jelas dan ringan diingat dan untuk agen yg nakal biasanya memiliki nama domain yg kurang masuk akal.
– Agen Taruhan Bola terpercaya biasanya memiliki staff pembeli service yg siap 24 jam dalam melayani pertanyaan anggota, untuk agen yg nakal biasanya akan membalas pertanyaan livechat dengan waktu yg tak cepat
– Agen Judi Bola terpercaya tentu saja memiliki staff operasional yg udah ketahui perihal apa yg mereka tawarkan dan untuk agen yg nakal biasanya tak ketahui apapun.

– Agen Judi Bola terpercaya biasanya memiliki kerja sama dengan sejumlah top bank local yg ada di indonesia tengah untuk agen yg nakal biasanya cuman akan memiliki satu saja rekening yg dipakai untuk transaksi.
Demikian udah tuntas pertemuan kita pada materi kesempatan berikut, moga-moga lebih kurang artikel kami ini dapat membantu anda mencetak kemenangan. Optimis anda konsisten main pada Agen Judi Taruhan Bola Online.


  1. Steve

    Don’t tell me there is yet another compressive report showing that the Warmists have got it all wrong!!

  2. SebastianH

    Sorry for needing to “parrot” again, but …

    Considering climate models are predicated on the presumption that the higher the CO2 concentration, the greater the loss of sea ice, these long-term trends strongly suggest that CO2 concentration changes are not the modulators of polar sea ice changes they are claimed to be.

    … that is a strange argument. Are you seriously suggesting that identical effects are always caused by the same cause?

    There is no logic in that assumption.

    1. Bitter&twisted


    2. Paul Aubrin

      If a cause A implies a consequence B, then the absence the consequence B implies the absence of the cause A. The hypothesis which says that higher CO2 concentrations imply less sea ice seems seems really questionable.

      1. AndyG55

        Basically ZERO correlation over anything but a TINY window of time.

        Absolutely ZERO scientific causality.

        Its a NON-hypothesis. !

      2. SebastianH

        First of all the CO2 GHE does not directly influence sea ice extend. That is an indirect effect of increased overall heat content.

        Next, if the amount of money in your bank account increases, then there is no single cause for that. It could be your wage, you won the lottery or someone just gifted you the money.

        If the sea ice extent decreases that is probably caused by an increase in temperature and that can have many causes, too.

        So, what Kenneth says is a pretty strange argument. It’s the same as saying that you are wrong in that you said your account balance increased because of a win in the lottery, because that wasn’t the case in the past, there it was always the wage. See the problem?

        1. AndyG55

          “First of all the CO2 GHE does not directly influence sea ice extend.”

          First of all, CO2 DOES NOT effect any temperatures, in any way what-so-ever.

          CERTAINLY NOT oceans,

          CERTAINLY NOT the atmosphere…

          NO PROOF it can warm ANYTHING.

          If you have empirical proof otherwise…

          THEN PRODUCE IT..

          Or remain an empty sack.

          1. SebastianH

            Have you managed to answer my question about the work a chair performs to hold you up? How much work for 1h of sitting on the chair? How much work for 2h? I don’t remember you answering that.

          2. tom0mason

            “First of all the CO2 GHE does not directly influence sea ice extend.”
            I note that these climate models incorporate a direct link between CO2 and sea ice loss —

            CSIRO Mk3.6.0
            GFDL CM3

            Probably all climate models have such a relationship baked into their code.

          3. AndyG55

            ROFLMAO, seb

            Your IGNORANCE astounds even me.

            I’ll give you the hint again,

            The units for “Strain Energy” are already in the units for “work”

            Are you REALLY that mathematically ILLITERATE that you cannot grasp a simple concept ???????

            Its apparent that you MOST DEFINITELY ARE.

            You don’t even realise, from the hint, that your question is a NONSENSE question.

            What SI units is “work X time”, seb?

            TOTALLY HILARIOUS. 🙂

          4. SebastianH

            Dear AndyG55,

            it’s good that you seem to be able to understand that the unit of work is not Joule, but Watt. To warm something up however, you need to add Joules and you do that by performing work for a time X. Sitting down on a chair makes to chair perform work exactly once, there is no continuous output of X Watt that could add to the heat content of anything.

            That’s why I am asking you how much work a chair is performing in 1h vs. 2h. There is no difference. And I don’t think you are getting that. This means whatever heating happens when you sit on the chair, it’s not going to last.

            Back to the atmosphere: your claim is that a continous compression is responsible for the incoming side of the heat content (unit Joule) equation, not the radiative properties of the atmosphere (“CO2 DOES NOT effect any temperatures, in any way what-so-ever”). For this to happen the compression would have to perform work (unit Watt) continously over time to provide Joules (work X time) for the heat content. But that is not the case. Otherwise you could demonstrate to us that there is a difference in the work output between sitting on a chair for 1h vs. 2h.

            In case you are not trolling and really mean that sitting down on a chair is a one time thing, but the warming from that event causes a constant temperature increase, please explain why the Joules added by this one time event don’t radiate/convect/evaporate away the same way all other Joules added to the heat content do?

            Or are you trolling us? Since you seem to also believe that one time warming events like an El Nino could cause step jumps in temperatures …

          5. AndyG55

            ROFLMAO……Poor seb,

            You have PROVEN to EVERYONE that you are TOTALLY CLUELESS.

            “perform work (unit Watt)” BS !!!!

            ANYONE can look up anywhere and find out that the unit of work is JOULE.

            A Watt is a unit of power (Joules/second)

            Strain energy is in Joules

            and there is NO SUCH UNIT as Joules X Time

            You really are one IGNORANT, MENTALLY and MATHEMATICALLY CONFUSED, little headless chook.

            No wonder you “believe” in fantasies like CO2 warming, and don’t comprehend basic physics such as auto compression of air raising it to and maintaining it at a certain temperature.

            Concepts of basic structural mechanics are WAY BEYOND YOU, because you can’t let go of your base level ignorance from the AGW scam.

          6. AndyG55

            “Back to the atmosphere:”

            You still haven’t got the intelligence to grasp basic physics of structures, how are you going to comprehend basic physics of gasses?

            The increase in lower atmosphere temperatures comes from static gravitational compression of that atmosphere as predicted by the ideal gas law itself.

            The low altitude molecules have decreased mean free path, higher collision rate, thus higher kinetic energy is registered, thus increased temperature.

            The units of kinetic energy are.. guess what, seb….

            …. JOULES, same as the work done by “strain energy”

            All this is very obviously WAY BEYOND YOU.

            No wonder you are SO GULLIBLE as to believe the fallacy of CO2 warming despite the TOTAL LACK of any sort of evidence.

          7. AndyG55

            “it’s good that you seem to be able to understand that the unit of work is not Joule, but Watt.”

            ROFLMAO… !!!

            Since you are so NIL-educated in physics…

            …maybe you should check basic units first…

            save embarrassing yourself.


            You really are looking like a NON-educated, D-Class IDIOT, today, seb. .. so..

            … No change from yesterday, or any day before that..

          8. yonason (from my cell phone)


            Evasive Activist Chatbot Sideshow Seb…
            …still making excuses for why he can’t produce the non-existent data to back up the “CO2 causes warming” assertion. Never a straight answer. Always with the distractions.

          9. SebastianH

            Oh there was a reply, but still no answer to the question.

            The units of kinetic energy are.. guess what, seb….

            …. JOULES, same as the work done by “strain energy”

            Guess what, the released energy from a detonation also has the unit Joules. Do those Joules cause an increase in temperature that lasts? No. Why?

            Compression of a gas to a certain point is also a one time event. The gas gets warmer during the compression and then the heat dissipates. There is no ongoing compression that causes a higher than expected surface temperature. Or can you forecast the date when sea level pressure will not be 1015 mb, but 1500 mb?

          10. AndyG55

            Poor seb, STILL running away from simple answers.

            STILL showing he has ZERO comprehension passed junior high level.

            Your understanding of atmospheric processes is basically anti-reality.

            The increase in temperature as you go lower in the atmosphere comes from static gravitational compression of that atmosphere, as predicted by the ideal gas law itself.

            The low altitude molecules have decreased mean free path, higher collision rate, thus increased temperature.

            That energy from compression is STORED as kinetic energy, just as the strain energy is stored in the chair you are sitting on.

            They are both measured in Joules, just like work done during that compression

        2. AndyG55

          “It’s the same as saying… blaaaahhhhh !!!”

          OMG, yet another totally illogical, totally IRRELEVANT, anti-science, fantasy anomaly from seb !!

          FFS, stick to science..

          oops.. you CAN’T…. you have NONE.

        3. Luke

          I like the bank account analogy, because it reminds me of the comment here that energy in the climate system cannot exceed 340 W per m squared. That’s like telling me I can never have more money in my bank account than my monthly wage! No wonder I’ m always skint!

          1. yonason (from my cell phone)

            You left out the part about expenses. If your expenditures exceed your income, of course you’ll be “skint.”

            If you’re referring to what I think you are, the warmists show a vast excess in places where it doesn’t belong. I.e., their “balance” doesn’t.

    3. Steve

      I am suggesting warmists have acute logical fallacyitis.
      That is on top of their other ‘acute bloated ego syndrome’ causing them to believe that CO2 is anything other than a non toxic gas beneficial to the greening to the planet.

    4. Virginia Llorca

      We are not talking about identical effects.

  3. AndyG55

    “In The Canadian Arctic, Temperatures May Have Reached 6°C Warmer Than Now, With 4 Months More Open Water (No Ice) Than Present”

    The OPPORTUNITIES for this open Arctic would be enormous. !!

    As opposed to the Arctic Ocean being a “no travel” zone for large proportions of the year.

    Unfortunately, the RECOVERY from the EXTREME extents of the late 1970s seems to have come to an end, and with the AMO turning, Arctic sea ice is likely to start increasing again.


    We are VERY MUCH in a COOLER period of the current interglacial, a minor bump above THE COLDEST PERIOD IN 10,000 years.

  4. tom0mason

    All those time there was low Arctic ice.
    Oh horror of horrors, how did the Polar Bears survive?

    1. AndyG55

      “how did the Polar Bears survive?”

      Well, obviously they couldn’t have.

      Polar bears are a thing of the past… like snow 😉

      1. yonason (from my cell phone)

        Bob Carter dealt with that in a video of his. While looking for that I found this and decided to make a different point. Specifically, Carter shows how they distort the data (lie) to sell their socialist program. Now, my point is, once you catch them lying to you, why on earth would you EVER trust them on anything ever again?! And yes, that includes activist chatbot shills for utter nonsense.


        1. Virginia Llorca

          I don’t have time to look this up again because I have laundry to fold, but could someone look up the article showing clearly where climate change fanatics erased parts of graphs so it wouldn’t show previous warming periods?

      2. yonason (from my cell phone)

        Lost another here, Pierre.

      3. tom0mason

        Indeed I have a mere 8cm of snow via the time machine just outside my window, and it ain’t going anywhere quick as it had a glaze of freezing rain cover overnight.

        The maverick gardening neighbors are very upset as took all the ‘climate authorities’ at their word and over the last few years planted drought resistant Mediterranean and subtropical plants — oh dear palm trees, citrus, and the like do not like freezing rain!
        The rock garden has survived. 🙂

  5. yonason (from my cell phone)

    “Throughout Much Of The Holocene, The Arctic Ocean Periodically Became Ice Free…”

    My guess is that they know the cyclical nature of climate, and we’re expecting temps to go up and ice to melt. If that had had happened they could claim their theory predicted it, and if they had been successful at putting their fascist policies in place, they could have claimed they had averted a catastrophe of global proportions wh n the cycle reversed. Sadly for them, but fortunately for us, many experts have been able to use the net to expose their scam.

    1. Virginia Llorca

      I hope the political (economic) agenda will become more obvious. How old is Al Gore? Maybe. . .

  6. tom0mason

    This bunch signed a paper by James Hansen
    A paper that specifically linked CO2 levels to global ice loss.

    Realization that today’s climate is far out of equilibrium with current climate forcings raises the specter of ‘tipping points’, the concept that climate can reach a point where, without additional forcing, rapid changes proceed practically out of our control….Arctic sea ice and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet are examples of potential tipping points. Arctic sea ice loss is magnified by the positive feedback of increased absorption of sunlight as global warming initiates sea ice retreat… West Antarctic ice loss can be accelerated by several feedbacks, once ice loss is substantial… We define: (1) the tipping level, the global climate forcing that, if long maintained, gives rise to a specific consequence, and (2) the point of no return, a climate state beyond which the consequence is inevitable, even if climate forcings are reduced. A point of no return can be avoided, even if the tipping level is temporarily exceeded. Ocean and ice sheet inertia permit overshoot, provided the climate forcing is returned below the tipping level before initiating irreversible dynamic change.

    Makiko Sato—NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute.
    Pushker Kharecha – NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, NY
    David Beerling—Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, UK
    Robert Berner—Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University
    Valerie Masson-Delmotte – Universite de Versailles
    Mark Pagani—Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University
    Maureen Raymo—Department of Earth Sciences, Boston University
    Dana L. Royer—Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Wesleyan University
    James C. Zachos —Earth & Planetary Sciences Dept., University of California, Santa Cruz

    and of course endorsed by weepy Bill McKibben and loony Dr. Joe Romm.

    The only ‘tipping point’ that actually happened was how much expensive liquor these numpties tipped before writing this nonsense.

    Read the summary of this pre-fossilized coprolite if you can find it, or go to here for a long précis of it.

    1. tom0mason

      Also see more modeled nonsense at
      From this 2016 stupidity comes —

      While climate models also simulate the observed linear relationship between sea ice area
      and CO2 emissions, they usually have a much lower sensitivity of the ice cover than has
      been observed. The study also finds that this is most likely because the models
      underestimate the atmospheric warming in the Arctic that is induced by a given CO

    2. yonason (from my cell phone)

      “…pre-fossilized coprolite…”


      Looks like 0bunko’s outreach to irrelevance was successful.

  7. tom0mason

    And of course from

    Many question that may be asked (again) have already been answered.

    1. yonason (from my cell phone)

      Not an answered question the chatbots won’t stop asking.

  8. Another New Paper Shows Arctic Sea Ice Has Been INCREASING Overall Since The 1930s | Un hobby...

    […] by K.  Richard, March 1st, 2018 in NoTricksZone […]

  9. AndyG55

    World UAH drops slightly for February.

    COOLER than, from least cool to more cool, for February…

    2016, 1998, 2010,2017, 2002, 2003, 2004.

    Drop is greatest in NH.

    1. tom0mason

      @ AndyG55
      What a non-suprise.

  10. studies: Arctic Sea Ice INCREASING Since The 1930s | Principia Scientific International

    […] Read rest at No Tricks Zone […]

  11. mwhite

    Meanwhile down south where it’s not even winter yet

    “Mission to giant A-68 berg thwarted by sea-ice”

    1. mwhite
    2. yonason (from my cell phone)


      You say it’s still summertime down below the equator? Well, that explains it. They don’t want to be bothered by academic subjects, like science. Warmists just want to have fun.

      Woo Hoo – Party Time!

      (Warmunistas are just dropouts from reality.)

  12. mwhite

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy