Rolling Stone + Al Gore
The latest Rolling Stone wants Al Gore to run for president, and believes he can win! Gore opposed the war in Iraq from the start, making the case that "The chaos in the aftermath of a military victory in Iraq could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States than we presently face from Saddam." Foresight is 20/20 for Al Gore.
Gore's biggest opponent would be Hillary, but she supported the war, and Gore knows her secrets. Obama is also a factor, but Rolling Stone believes that with Hillary, Obama, and Edwards duking it out, there's a nice opportunity for Gore to slip in and take the Democratic nomination. Gore also polls better or even with McCain. Again, Gore's foresight is better even than McCain's hindsight on the war.
Al Gore would make the environment a priority. That is good for our national security, and our economy. An innovative environmental policy would encourage small businesses, as Jim Webb mentioned in his response to the SOTU. This is a Democratic priority, and should be an American priority. Plus, the new cars are really cool!
I like Gore. He would have been a far better president that Bush has turned out to be. It will be tough to shake me from Obama. No one has inspired me like he does. But, Rolling Stone makes a good case.
Gore's biggest opponent would be Hillary, but she supported the war, and Gore knows her secrets. Obama is also a factor, but Rolling Stone believes that with Hillary, Obama, and Edwards duking it out, there's a nice opportunity for Gore to slip in and take the Democratic nomination. Gore also polls better or even with McCain. Again, Gore's foresight is better even than McCain's hindsight on the war.
Al Gore would make the environment a priority. That is good for our national security, and our economy. An innovative environmental policy would encourage small businesses, as Jim Webb mentioned in his response to the SOTU. This is a Democratic priority, and should be an American priority. Plus, the new cars are really cool!
I like Gore. He would have been a far better president that Bush has turned out to be. It will be tough to shake me from Obama. No one has inspired me like he does. But, Rolling Stone makes a good case.
By terra - 1/25/2007
71 Comments:
Question:
Which of one of our Presidents did the most to protect the environment?
Richard M Nixon - passed the Clean Air, Water, and Endagered species act because of the green revolution in the 60's/70's.
That being said, I do not think that have the social revolution to make a big change yet.
Gore could shake me from Obama. He has been right on every major issue for decades.
I just don't think Gore is going to run.
I still get near tears when i think about 2000. And wonder why in the hell he didnt run in 2004.
I think Gore is in a great position compared to 6-7 years ago. What a comeback, he was beaten, maybe even cheated out of the top job and he chose to focus on a issue that is important to him.
I really wish he would run, I just don't think he will.
Terra, I'd like to see Gore in the race. If he were our nominee, it would give voters an opportunity to look back on the progress of the nation since 2000. Plus, Gore is an expert in more issues than just Global Warming and brings real gravitas to the ticket. He would pair up nicely with a Senator like Obama, Edwards, or Governor Richardson. Run Gore!
Skeptical One, Nixon had a Democratic House and Senate.
The comments I hear about Gore are so much different from those I hear about Hillary. She sucks. Everyone wants him to run. It will be interesting.
BTW, you can buy 4-person electric cars starting at $10,000 near Pittsburgh! Check it out.
terra, i would watch all the hillary bashing. she might be your nominee.
Anonymous, I would watch the threats, they just might come back to haunt you.
Gore= OK, Edwards & Wes Clark even better
FYI: the right has launched a premtive character assassination on Obama concerning his biological father being a Moslem and he , converting to Christianity.
I recd a couple of these propaganda emails that I erased
& TRUE Nixon was very responsive to the Nation's environment. This was consistent with the Repub tenets of taking good care of the Republic. Now they dont seem to know republic from ricola...RIIIIIIEEEECCOLAAAAAAA
Petey, I saw that too. CNN debunked the whole Muslim school thing. And Fox News said ... are you ready ... 'the CNN reporter who debunked the story probably went to the same school.'
I'm curious about why you think Edwards has more experience than Obama. Obama served in the Illinois state Senate before being a Senator. He has served 4 years so far in the Senate. And he has a law degree. Edwards was a laywer before he served only 2 years in the Senate before dropping out to run for VP. It seems to me that Obama has more experience.
Edwards did very well in 2004 before Kerry bullnosed him out
He has the charisma and his views fit the time - the time is ripe fro him.
Most of all he is farther into the process (meat grinder) than Barack and Edwards has acclimated quite well.
I also think that the dogfight that will occur between Hillary and all the Dem candidates ---Barack would do well to wait. Possibly the process would be good experience for him but I don't see him getting the nom.
There is also the bigotry issue - Imagine 4 or 8 more yrs of Repub presidents
Another point- In our current ghastly military mess, I think Wesley Clark (Nato Cmdr.) would be a big plus on the ticket (VP) or James Webb (Sec of Navy) (VP)
We will see what shakes out whoever get the Dem Nom, I will support but certainly hope that the BEST candidate is chosen
Glad Kerry bowed out - he will do well as a senior senator
Terra, Keep up the good work and the Can Do spirit
The Democrats should win the White House in 08 but if Gore is your man all bets are off. If Hillary doesnt destroy him first his global doom sermonizing will. The point when running for office unfortuantely is not whether you are right or not, it is how it plays. Remember Jimmy Carter and his sweaters?
I would agree with the idea that this is Gore's best chance to become President, much better than in 2000, because he has had a chance to truly define and separate himself from the shadow of Bill Clinton. Gore's situation now is much the same as Nixon's was in 1968 - he will be 8 years removed from an unsuccessful campaign and coming in on the heals of 8 years of war turmoil and bad times in general in the Whitehouse. Short of an assassination this is nearly the exact same scenario as in '68 except the teams have switched sides. If Gore runs he will have the same success Nixon did then and the democrats could very well be looking at a two-term Presidency.
...Al Gore would make the environment a priority. That is good for our national security, and our economy.
Wrong. Getting off foreign oil and using more alternative fuels would be good for our national security and our environment. Politicizing global warming (which is caused by the SUN, by the way, which is why the polar ice caps on Mars are now melting - unless you can pin that one on Republicans and corporations) has removed science from the study and made it an alarmist tidbit to get elected.
But even if you assume WE are creating global warming, and not the Sun, our orbit and something called wobble and you assume the worst-case scenarios, delaying substantial cuts in CO2 emissions for the next 25 years would produce an additional global temperature rise of no more than a few tenths of a degree C by the year 2100. (3) That means we have at least 25 years in which to sharpen our understanding of climate, seek more accurate predictions, and find new technologies to address the alleged problem. With the U.S. federal government alone spending some $3 billion a year on climate change research, it would seem to be a sure bet that our knowledge will be much more complete a quarter-century from now.
If an incremental warming of a few tenths of a degree, spread over decades, should in fact occur, it would constitute no hazard to ecosystems or human well-being. Economists and agricultural scientists say it would probably be beneficial. Hence, given all of these variables, policies made in haste or based on poor information are likely to have a destructive impact on the U.S. and world economies and the well-being of their citizens.
Plus, Gore is an expert in more issues than just Global Warming and brings real gravitas to the ticket.
You're a funny man.
Debate all you want wise guy, but Gore would be a big improvement from what we have now...
Russ makes good points, is all you have to offer a flippant result. Good Job Russ-keep it coming
Have you noticed that human-inhabited islands are sinking? Some animals are no longer hibernating. They're not migrating as they used to, so they're missing key feeding and mating seasons. Bugs are overtaking regions they haven't previously reached because of temperature. I know they don't talk about that on Fox or Limbaugh, but it's happening. Open your mind.
So, Russ, these so called incremental changes are having a HUGE impact on the ecosystem of the planet right now! It is a very fragile system. It is so simplistic (childlike) to say it's caused by the sun. No duh! The sun is hot so it makes things hot. But, our atmosphere used to be able to block out part of the sun's rays to keep the planet at a stable temperature for life to function. It is no longer able to do that because of harmful emissions.
Have you noticed that human-inhabited islands are sinking? Some animals are no longer hibernating. They're not migrating as they used to, so they're missing key feeding and mating seasons. Bugs are overtaking regions they haven't previously reached because of temperature. I know they don't talk about that on Fox or Limbaugh, but it's happening.
I'm not debating the fact that there are changes in temperature. What the open and honest scientists are saying is that you cannot blame man. We simply don't know enough, yet.
Open your mind, Terra-bear.
The sun is hot so it makes things hot. But, our atmosphere used to be able to block out part of the sun's rays to keep the planet at a stable temperature for life to function. It is no longer able to do that because of harmful emissions.
So what caused the glacial (colder) and interglacial (warmer) periods before mankind industrialized? Why was Texas covered in ice, and what caused it to melt? Wooly-mammoths? Seriously, Terra...during a 100,000-year cycle, the tug of other planets on the Earth causes its orbit to change shape. It shifts from a short, broad ellipse that keeps the Earth closer to the sun, to a long flat ellipse that allows it to move farther from the sun and back again.
At the same time the Earth is orbiting, it also spins around an axis that tilts lower and then higher during a 41,000-year cycle. Close to the poles, the contrast between winter and summer is greatest when the tilt is large. The Earth wobbles because it is spinning around an axis that tilts back and forth. Thus, a temperature drop occurs in the Northern Hemisphere when it tilts away from the sun; then the same thing happens in the Southern Hemisphere and again in the North, in a 22,000-year cycle.
William Gray, the foremest hurricane expert in the world. He predicted in early August the US would see hurricanes like we've never seen before. That was weeks before katrina. A few quotes from THE weather expert who's been used by the US Navy in Discover Magazine:
"Right now I’m trying to work on this human-induced global-warming thing that I think is grossly exaggerated."
"If it is, it [human induced global warming]is causing such a small part that it is negligible. I’m not disputing that there has been global warming. There was a lot of global warming in the 1930s and ’40s, and then there was a slight global cooling from the middle ’40s to the early ’70s. And there has been warming since the middle ’70s, especially in the last 10 years. But this is natural, due to ocean circulation changes and other factors. It is not human induced."
"Nearly all of my colleagues who have been around 40 or 50 years are skeptical as hell about this whole global-warming thing. But no one asks us. If you don’t know anything about how the atmosphere functions, you will of course say, “Look, greenhouse gases are going up, the globe is warming, they must be related.” Well, just because there are two associations, changing with the same sign, doesn’t mean that one is causing the other"
"The Atlantic has had more of these storms [hurricanes]in the least 10 years or so, but in other ocean basins, activity is slightly down. Why would that be so if this is climate change? The Atlantic is a special basin? The number of major storms in the Atlantic also went way down from the middle 1960s to the middle ’90s, when greenhouse gases were going up."
Finally, he was asked, "Why is there scientific support for the idea? [of human induced global warming]" His answer...
"So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing—all these big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more. Now that the cold war is over, we have to generate a common enemy to support science, and what better common enemy for the globe than greenhouse gases?"
What I find most interesting is that you, terra, are so quick to jump on the bandwagon without truly considering other opinions. These guys aren't receiving tons of grant money like the human induced global warming advocats are. They take their grant money, have nice labs, and tell the alarmists what they want to hear. They say what the alarmists don't want to hear, and they end up being a substitute 7th grade science teacher.
You're listening to Al Gore, who is a POLITICIAN and a major shareholder (though a trust established by his family) of Occidental Petroleum stock. Big Oil. Oh no! He didn't mention that in his movie.
But please read this...it's mentioned here:
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468
And while this SHOULD upset you, I have the strangest feeling it won't upset you in the least. You'll find a reason to think it's okay.
Here's a fun video for everyone. It seems to explain global warming from Bush's and Russ' point of view.
russ and the republicans are the ones politicizing Global Warming.
fred, maybe gore would be bad. but that is a sad statement for the country. because what you call "sermonizing" is in fact dealing with a very serious reality - one that Bush and his supporters have totally ignored for 6 years.
i dont beleive in global warming.
Russ is an idiot...
terra, russ takes the time to formulate a well thought out intelligent post and you dig up some ideo as a rebuttal? Well done Russ, you have won the argument because ter-bear cannot come up with a response. Ben you seem to be correct as Russ has already demonstrated.-
anonymous-you are an idiot. Russ keep hitting them where it hurts, their brains.
Everyone should join The Chief Source email list and get insider information. Fill out the form on our home page. Thanks.
We do not share our email list with anyone.
Ben, I went to a lecture at NOAA atmospheric lab in Boulder Colorado last year.
There, I was shown photos of the polar caps from about 1950 to the present. This year, 3 times the area of Texas - North polar ice has melted and the melt is accelerating. The Ice caps are shrinking. This is undeniable.
Another major item they discussed is the Gulf stream in the North latitudes is cooling and changing course. I will let you guess what happens to the British Isles and Scandinavia if the warm Gulf Steam that delivers tropical warming water to that area stops doing so.
Believe me - there IS Global Warming - commonly now known as Climate Change.
Watch the Climate Code on the Weather channel 5 PM Sundays with Dr. Heidi Cullen.
Russ,
I commend you for presenting your case in a logical fact base manner. Let people throw rocks and attempt to discredit you as a person. It does not lessen your position.
Here is one more absolutely incredible idiotic action taken by the Bush Admin.
Why the hell would anyone deny science?
Investigators eye censorship claims about White House
Amateurs can argue global warming one way or another to suit their own political mindset. Makes no nevermind to me. But consider this:
There is no scientific debate about whether human activity is contributing to global warming. Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. In 2002, the Bush administration’s EPA concluded that global warming the the last 20 years was “due mostly to human activity.”
So Fred, how is that for presenting in a "fact based manner."
Ben, that's embarrassing. Do you believe the Sun revolves around the Earth? You don't have to believe the consequences are as dire as some suggest, but to deny it as a whole puts you in the same category as assholes that don't believe in dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs: They are kept in Jurasaic Park
Even Dr. Carl Baugh on Trinity the Broadcasting Network claims that there were dinosaurs on the Ark..... but just wee baby ones so they didn't eat the cast and crew. No explanation as to how Noah and his boys separated the young dinos from their parents. I guess the devil is in the details.
Hey! Why are all my comments now showing up under anonymous? Is this some vast, left wing conspiracy?
- Russ
There, I was shown photos of the polar caps from about 1950 to the present. This year, 3 times the area of Texas - North polar ice has melted and the melt is accelerating. The Ice caps are shrinking. This is undeniable.
Petey - No one is denying it is happening. They are saying it is the result of changes in our orbit, wobble and solar activity.
Hello *tap tap tap* Is this thing on?
Mencken - there are many scientists who argue the cause.
Let me say this again, slowly and with feeling...
You're a scientist. The Cold War has ended. Your government funding is cut, and for some, eliminated.
Environmental activists, in search of something to scare us with, see global warming as "the apocalypse du jour," and politicians pick up on this. Big time grant money is given to scientists who are scrambling to do something verses teaching high school physics. Those providing the funding think global warming is human induced.
You now have a job, a nice lab, and free money being thrown at you. What will your results be? This issue is SO GRAY that of course you tell the hand feeding you that they are correct.
Now...if anyone really wants to debate this, great. Or do we want to look at funny videos and call each other names?
Or has this sight been put up just so you guys can all hug each other and pat each other on the back and criticize and name-call those you disagree with?
- Russ
I find Russ's argument extremely non convincing - the source of his information is "The weather expert" who the hell is that?
Who say's global warming is due to the wobbling of the earth?
Are you denying that CO2, which for 5 billion years was stored in the ground and only in the past 300 years has started to be released to the air, has had no affect on the environment?
The most comforting thing about this whole conversation is people like Russ who deny Climate Change are now in the very small minority
Lets cut all the crap.
Global warming is the result of pumping an enormous amount of Co2 into the atmosphere - thereby causing the greenhouse effect.
Geezuz you guys- you deny the above same as if someone believed that WWII was caused by Tralfamadorians experimenting with time travel
Read som goddam scientific writings!
the denial argument is based on propaganda that supports continued -status quo burning of fossil fuel.
God forbid that the poor oil companies get their wings clipped and they thus may cut off all that goody- goody graft to all the poor poor politicians.
I will tell you what my Uncle told me once -
YOU NEED SOME SENSE BEAT INTO YA!
If you don't believe scientists who say that global warming is real and is caused by co2, who will you believe?
I think Russ' poitt was that there is conflicting scientific evidence on what is causing global warming Petey. If you look around you can find information from reputable scientists on both sides of the argument. People here seem awfully quick to jump all over someone for having a viewpoint different from his/her own and then systemactically and unjustly lump that person in with people like Bush or others who don't hold reasonable views. That's a great bully tactic but not a good way to look at the pint Russ was trying to make - that maybe there is a reason outside of the obivous as to why global warming has been pushed so hard lately - it is good politics. Since a lot of people around ehre like to chalk things up to conspiracy I don't think that argument is so far-fetched.
Terra - I'd like to think someone that claims to be an educator would be a little more open to discussing differing scientific opinions than you have shown. Do you jump down your students throats and try to ostracize them when they have a view different from your own? If that is the case then it is truly a sad commentary on your own person and the future of the students you claim to "teach".
anon - Here are some links to articles I sighted. Good God, dude (or maybe you're a girl?), are you that freaking blind you can't even consider another viewpoint???
Discover magazine interview with Dr. William Gray:
http://www.discover.com/issues/sep-05/departments/discover-dialogue/
Another interview with Dr. William Gray, foremost authority on hurricanes:
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4403
Scientists opposing human-induced global warming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus
Heartland Institute:
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15726
I'll keep going if you wish, not that ANY of you even have the balls to admit that what's being presented is slightly plausible, because as I have figured out, you're all climatologists! Or you've fallen hook, line and sinker for the liberal agenda which clearly states on page 248:
Make people think they NEED government in their lives.
- Russ
hey russ. i believe you can lick on my balls if you think it's not caused by humans. it's not some political agenda. douche bag
Funny how those with different views stoop down to name calling when they can not support their points. Nice touch..
I'm not a teacher. Never said I was.
Anonymous...if you cannot argue without name calling, then please kindly shut your fucking mouth. Grow up.
The most comforting thing about this whole conversation is people like Russ who deny Climate Change are now in the very small minority.
The minority also thought the Earth was flat at one point in time. Science is about analyzing all points of view and drawing the best conclusion.
And when you have Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi barking about human induced global warming, who is politicizing it?
The above should read the minority thought the Earth was ROUND at one time.
Proofread, Russ!
I find it funny that everyone here is arguing over heresay-nobody is a climate expert, nobody can interpret the data so we are fed lines and listen to what supports our point of view and anecdotal experience. Then when someone does the exact same thing but with the opposite interpretation we respond with lick my balls, and stupid youtube videos because when all is said and done nobody knows shit. I mean terra reads one book and all of a sudden she is galileo? get real, and Russ reads his stuff and is citing astrophysics?? I don't know a thing either but I am not gonna pretend like I do and then belittle my fellow man because he is also an ignorant ass
i'm rubber,your glue your bull "stuff" bounces of me and sticks to you. happy russell. i bet if dubya said is was cause by human pollutants you would be giving yourself a hand job and doing something to stop the threat. i hope you get skin cancer. the day they prove its true
Sorry Wally to upset you.Keep in mind that blogging by nature is argumentive and in your face kind of stuff - but NOTHING real lypersonal is meant, at least not from me.
On the Global warming issue: of course its being politicized --- isnt everthing these days.
& Russ thanks for the heads ups on those articles . I read one in discover mag and the author believes in Global warming and also the natural aspects of Climate Change. Sort of like believing in God & evolution and the Big Bang (My beliefs) simultaneously.
Maybe we should not be so quick to polarize (as taught by the comtemporary Two Party system) and draw lines in the dirt and challenge each other to a duel. But of course, thats part of the fun of blogging.
Mental Notes from this thread:
1.) Global warming is real
2.) we have been burning TOO much carbon into the atmosphere for too long and should strive to knock it off (Kyoto)
3.) the percantages of respective contributing factors to climate change Natural v Mancaused are very very debatable and tend to overshadow #2.
4.) The US should strive to cut down carbon pollution as a matter of policy
5.) All Repubs should get some beer kick-back-liberal and watch Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth (Come on BEN!)
5.) Not everyone who disagrees with Petey is a lowlife lily livered Neobastard.
Have a Nice Weekend
DR Heidi Cullen is a fox and I believe anything she tells me.
Too bad for her I am not 30 yrs younger!
Sorry Terra - got carried away....But you are a "teacher" - I have learned oodles from your postings.
PS: I was an engineering major who was inducted into an Education fraternity - a long time ago...lay person are great "teachers" also.
one major thing that all of you have missed is the fact that the united states is the largest polluter in the world, and continually strive to stop any sort of environmentalism which would inhibit the posibility of maximizing profit for major corporations and their whores we call our government.
D
Funny Assed thing: Our US automakers have lobbied our Govt to allow poor MPG rating on automobiles. Now, even China has much higher MPG ratings than the US- which rates as among the poorest MPG automobiles in the world.
I wonder why Ford and GM are in such deep trouble - could it be that our products are considered inferior by world standards (MPG among others)????
The defintion of politicizing:
disagreeing with someone else's "facts"
The definition of a moron:
A person who only reads or listens to that which supports their preconceived position.
one major thing that all of you have missed is the fact that the united states is the largest polluter in the world, and continually strive to stop any sort of environmentalism which would inhibit the posibility of maximizing profit for major corporations and their whores we call our government.
Wrong. Look at india and China.
Interesting blog profiling a liberal University of Penn professor of geology and global climate change studies. He thinks Gore's used scare tactics to politicize global warming, and likens him to Karl Rove.
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2007/01/wrong-button-to-push-no-friend-of-bush.html
one major thing that all of you have missed is the fact that the united states is the largest polluter in the world, and continually strive to stop any sort of environmentalism which would inhibit the posibility of maximizing profit for major corporations and their whores we call our government.
Wrong. Look at india and China.
Interesting blog profiling a liberal University of Penn professor of geology and global climate change studies. He thinks Gore's used scare tactics to politicize global warming, and likens him to Karl Rove.
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2007/01/wrong-button-to-push-no-friend-of-bush.html
ok buddy. what's your point?
#1 United States: 5,762,050
#2 China: 3,473,600
#3 Russia: 1,540,360
#4 Japan: 1,224,740
#5 India: 1,007,980
#6 Germany: 837,425
#7 United Kingdom: 558,225
#8 Canada: 521,404
#9 Italy: 446,596
#10 Mexico: 385,075
D
co2 emmisions by country. if you would like to know more go to nationmaster.com. it's not biased it's statistical data gathered fromseveral sources. you can see how pathetic the united states is when it comes to the environment. better luck next time russ.
D
Additionally, Russ, Al Gore is not currently serving in any political position. He is lecturing. He is not funding anyone, nor has he had the power to suggest funding for 6+ years. Remember? The Republicans have been in Congress! He didn't campaign for anyone (that I can remember) so how can he be compared to Rove? He certainly isn't going to push any party boy like Rove did for Bush. He is trying to teach people that our lifestyle is having a lasting effect on the planet. Could it be that the scientists would have loved to find that what we're doing is fine, but they didn't, and they looked for a voice because no one is going to listen to a scientist? They found a willing ear in Al Gore, and he has taken THEIR cause to the public because he could. Again, who are you going to trust to tell you that we are harming the planet and global warming is real?
hey russ. if me and my friend were going to rape some girl, would you rape her too just because we decided we were going to do it?
I watched Inconvenient Truth friday night.
Lord- I have seen the light!
Anyone who misses this because they dont like Al Gore is cheating themselve to a very good science lesson.
GREAT JOB AL!
And thank you for the Heads up Chiefsource
Anon - interesting website. Found the same stats on wikipedia. If I didn't read climatologists who oppose the view that CO2 emissions contribute to global warming, I might even agree with you. As for how "pathetic" this country is, please feel free to stop using all CO2 producing products. And stop farting.
Terra - Gore is priming for a run at the presidency. Whether he actually announces this is one thing. I'm not sure he has the stomach to go up against Hillary.
Anon - Violence against women is in no way, shape or form something that you should compare an argument over global warming to.
Petey - Just consider the fact that many meteorologists and climatologists think An Inconvenient Truth is pure BS. The reason being is that the scientists involved specialize in environmental impact science, as in, "IF it gets warmer, then polar ice will melt." They are not environmental cause scientists. Believe it or not, people much smarter than you and I disagree that CO2 is the cause for global warming.
russ, your argument is weak. i guess the european union and the cia world FACTbook are lying? i'm sorry your right i apoligize. you got your argument from somebodies blog who qouted some professor
D
Wow, Terra, Great post! You go, AGAIN Girl!!!!
Your mother
Russ, They are much smarter than us but having their bread buttered by propagandists - they will say anything.
The fact that CO2 in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect hence ice melts is as clear as can be.
Deny that and you deny yourself
Terra, Congrats, you generated this much interest.
TerraMom: Be Proud!
Russ, They are much smarter than us but having their bread buttered by propagandists - they will say anything.
Bingo! Petey! I think that's what I've been saying.
The fact that CO2 in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect hence ice melts is as clear as can be.
You are not factoring in other influences. It's like observations of old...
...if you leave raw meat out, maggots appear. Were the maggots created BY the spoiling meat? Or was there another contributing factor (fly eggs) to their maggoty appearence?
russ, i'm not sure if you even know what you say
OK Russ: Global Warming is caused by Tralfamadorains experimenting withe TimeTravel BirthControl TransGenDer Devices
PS: Ozone Depletion IZ CauZed by Cow FlatUlaTion
wow gold cheap wow gold buy wow gold world of warcraft gold wow world of warcraft wow gold WoW Warrior WoW Hunter WoW Rogue WoW Paladin WoW Shaman WoW Priest WoW Mage WoW Druid WoW Warlock power leveling powerleveling wow power leveling wow powerleveling wow guides wow tips google排名 google左侧排名 google排名服务 百度推广 百度排名 网站推广 商业吧 机床 LED灯 电池 塑料 摄像机 移民 甲醇 染料 福州热线 体育博客 股票博客 游戏博客 魔兽博客 考试博客 汽车博客 房产博客 电脑博客 powerlin518 logo design website design web design 商标设计
Post a Comment
<< Home