Not when, as I previously published here, one compares the posts per month average for one's existence here. You still come out on top. Aren't you proud? Try that, ol' smart one and see how that math does not lie.

As I recall you had all or nearly all the numbers wrong in that post.   Not smart.

Did you have anything to say about your flawed/junk science reports on nitrogen, miss liar?

I was just secondarily wondering about all this......

"3. Calculate the amount of pollution per square mile."

Nothing in your wisdom tells anyone how to do this! Per square mile of what? 

I thought step 2.  Measure the drainage area, gave you enough of a clue.   Should be able to figure it out even without that clue, but you're evidently denser than I thought.

The reports you offered said they did not measure full time and some streams were not measured at all!

Of course not.   Too expensive.   Although I do believe most stream gaging stations now record stream flow continuously in real time and transmit to a central location.   If you check them out you'll find an antenna at each pointed to a satellite.

To help you understand this.   Consider the poll results of who supports a particular person for president.   Do you think the ask every voter?   No, they do a statistical sample.   You can do that in measuring pollution too.  That shouldn't be that hard to understand.

Likewise....you have 7 simple steps offered that you could never offer before on this matter. Why not?

They were presented in somewhat different wording but close enough for an 11 year old to understand.   I can't help it if you didn't get it.

Why all the lies and junk science links if after ALL THESE MONTHS, it came down to 7 simple steps that you list? (See step 3 again!; above!)

Yep, see step 3 above again.

What a friggen moron!

I think this must apply to you.