Anybody hear the one about the scientists who made stuff up and had half the country believing them?

Or can you tell me how many units of alcohol per person should be considered to be the "safe limit"?

Now that they have admitted to making up the numbers for the recommended alcohol intake are all of you who quote supposed scientific evidence feeling quite so comfortable with what these same scientists tell you about everything else?

Or do you feel silly for believing a word that they've said?

How long until some of them have the balls to admit that all of their so called evidence on climate change is just as much bull?


Who's dafter- the doyles who made the "evidence" up or the rarfs who fall for all of their crap hook, line and sinker?

P.S. Could a pub landlord sue them for loss of earnings between the period that they lied til the date when they retracted it?

scientists get bumped off f they tell the truth

Mr Ripper Says: "How long until some of them have the balls to admit that all of their so called evidence on climate change is just as much bull?"

I find it a bit sus that they've discovered climate change is due to CO2 emmisions just when it's time to renew nuclear power stations much against public opinion.

so................who am I sueing again?
The rarfs or the doyles?
The rarfs told the doyles not to drink, but the doyles should not have listened to the rarfs, and should have continued drinking.

PS Ripper, the footy's back on again!!!
I'm still fuming about Sunday though

these doils know how to drink

the Clann O DubhGhaill / Clan Doyle Exists to promote and strengthen a mutual interest and fellowship throughout the World between all persons bearing the family name of Doyle, Doyel, O'Doyle, or their relatives.

I NEVER TOOK ANY NOTICE ANY WAY,DOYLES OR RARFS OR PEOPLE OF A SCIENTIFIC NATURE ,SO THE FOOTBALLS BACK ON ON SUNDAY PARMO ,HOME FOR ANOTHER WEEK SO WILL POP IN AND SEE YOU ON (BAHRAINPOOLIE)