|
 
Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! Please  login or  register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
|
 johnm214
 
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
 Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098408 - 03/03/08 04:43 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
supernovasky said:
Quote:
Cherry-picking is all they have.
If they made a presentation before a scientifically literate audience using their snipped and clipped charts and fingerpaintings they would be laughed out of the auditorium.
Trust me, I know. Being someone who'se had to give a presentation in front of a scientifically literate audience on a scientific finding, it is one of the most stressful things a person can do. You know that each and every person there is smarter than you, or at least, thats how you feel. Each one has their own obscure, but excellent research, waiting like a gunnery turret to strike ANYTHING you say that is wrong down. So it takes months of fact checking leading up to the event to even feel like you MIGHT get out alive.
Come off it with the ad hominems, hows about you talk about the argument?
I don't know why you think your the only one here who's had to *gasp* give a talk/presentation to people in your field.
You just come of as arrogant and presumptious when you talk like this, especially since you're trying to evoke some bullshit respect for your station in life/education without disclosing what exactly that is.
|
 supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098430 - 03/03/08 04:47 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Here are the 3 major model's trends, WITH trendlines:
GISS:
NCDC:
hadCrut:
The spike in 1998 was strong, but because of the years before it and the years after it, it is obviously an anomaly year. The anomaly is EASILY explainable -- el-nino. What is crazy, is that El-nino has weakened since then (this is measurable, folks), but the temperature has slightly increased!
Edited by supernovasky (03/03/08 05:36 PM)
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: johnm214]
#8098444 - 03/03/08 04:51 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Come off it with the ad hominems, hows about you talk about the argument?
I don't know why you think your the only one here who's had to *gasp* give a talk/presentation to people in your field.
You just come of as arrogant and presumptious when you talk like this, especially since you're trying to evoke some bullshit respect for your station in life/education without disclosing what exactly that is.
Alright, man, what's your problem?
"hows about you talk about the argument"?
I would think after the last 6 pages, this would be the WEAKEST criticism of my posts. That I have not been arguing the science.
As far as me saying I've had to give a talk/presentation, I was merely responding to someone talking about giving scientific presentations and how if these guys tried to bring their data in a conference, they'd be laughed out of the room.
As far as disclosing what my position in life is or who I am, I prefer to keep that private on a DRUG FORUM.
And as far as the arrogance, I am sorry if I am coming across as arrogant. I am just a bit angered at false claims and deliberate misrepresentation of data.
Also, I find it suspect that you call me out for saying THIS, which can perhaps, in the most liberal definition of the word, be called ad-hominem, but you do not call out these quotes by those who have been arguing against global warming:
Quote:
Zappa:
Thanks, you keep making my point. My agenda is not to see gullible nitwits driven to useless panic over NOTHING. Like alar. Google that: alar scare. You'll actually get a result.
Quote:
Jeff:
some jackasses editing a journal cannot ensure credible results or conclusions
Quote:
Zappa:
Kool-aid drinkers need not bother.
Quote:
Zappa:
Mr Hansen, the censored scientist with a giant megaphone.
Quote:
Zappa:
Hansen is no more of a scientist than Al Gore and the IPCC is no more of a scientific organization than ELF.
Quote:
Zappa:
Yes, I've mentioned this in other threads most notably about the bullshit artist Hansen who got caught with his thumb on the scale.
Edited by supernovasky (03/03/08 05:35 PM)
|
MushmanTheManic
Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,410
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098569 - 03/03/08 05:15 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Concerned Citizens United Against Drugs and Terrorism
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098650 - 03/03/08 05:28 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
In fact, I would like to bring up Zapa's statement...
Quote:
Hansen is no more of a scientist than Al Gore and the IPCC is no more of a scientific organization than ELF.
Care to give ANY factual backing for these obvious ad-hominem attacks? A scientist with a Ph.D. and decades of research on the environment is no more a scientist than Al Gore, someone who, though I respect, is certainly no scientist...
and the IPCC, made up of many countries and many scientists, is no more a scientific organization than an eco-terrorist group? Care to give me the scientific publication record of the ELF?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 12,229
Last seen: 10 hours, 54 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098857 - 03/03/08 06:07 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
IPCC is admittedly a political organization by it's definition and makeup. Hansen has himself become a political creature by dint of his roadshow whining that he is being "censored" and further illustrated by the very article you excerpted.
Since you had no problem with Hansen being the author of the piece you cited why did you not identify it as such? After repeated requests by me. His research has become unreliable because of it. He is not a disinterested scientist. He is an advocate who seemingly despises corporations for some reason. His objectivity is shot. Shot, gone, ruined.
--------------------
"For anyone who cares I know zappaisgod personally. He is gay. He is jewish. He is a douche. And he both, has a crush on me:" Some Incredible Retard
|
carbonhoots
old hand
Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,321
Loc: BC Canada
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: zappaisgod]
#8098915 - 03/03/08 06:21 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Maybe Supernovasky is Hansen!
--------------------
-I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 21 minutes, 56 seconds
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8098955 - 03/03/08 06:29 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Also, I find it suspect that you call me out for saying THIS, which can perhaps, in the most liberal definition of the word, be called ad-hominem, but you do not call out these quotes
Because it isn't against forum rules to disrespect references or people that are not directly involved in the debate. Calling Zappa a horrid asshole would be wrong. Calling Zappa's wife insane for putting up with such a horrid asshole would also be wrong. Pointing out that Mr.Hansen is a schmuck on the level of Al Gore is a bit childish, but not wrong (against the forum rules). It is our attempt to keep debate from degrading into name calling while avoiding censorship as much as possible.
Back to the topic...
Edot:
> Maybe Supernovasky is Hansen!
It still wouldn't be wrong without disclosure, which has been requested and denied, thus Hansen is fair game, regardless.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
Edited by Seuss (03/03/08 06:32 PM)
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: zappaisgod]
#8098996 - 03/03/08 06:36 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
IPCC is admittedly a political organization by it's definition and makeup. Hansen has himself become a political creature by dint of his roadshow whining that he is being "censored" and further illustrated by the very article you excerpted.
Since you had no problem with Hansen being the author of the piece you cited why did you not identify it as such? After repeated requests by me. His research has become unreliable because of it. He is not a disinterested scientist. He is an advocate who seemingly despises corporations for some reason. His objectivity is shot. Shot, gone, ruined.
So you admitted it. You have no facts to show that Hansen is less of a scientist than Gore is. Do you even know Hansen's credentials? Certainly more than myself or anyone else on this forum, and certainly more than Gore. Many of his scientific papers were correct, and he is one of the most referenced scientists in all climatology journals.
As far as the IPCC, being a political organization has no effect on it being equated to an eco-terrorist group. It is a political group that favors the inclusion of good climatology science in government policy. It is a political group because it unifies climatologists from all different countries. It is a SCIENTIFIC group because it has one of the most vigorous peer review processes of any scientific journal.
And no, I had no problem with Hansen being the author of the piece I cited. Who better to defend the man than himself? It was HIS direct answers to the claims that the change was "groudbreaking and shameful." You can go read his own answer, that I posted, rather than being fed news reports from secondary sources. Furthermore, you missed where I DID identify the author as Hansen.
Here is the post you asked me who wrote it: here
For the next 7 posts, I was writing long rebuttals to the science before I answered your trivial question on who the author was...
here is where I say who the author was
Apparently you missed this, because here was your post after I said who the author was:
here
Apparently you KEPT missing that I identified the author, because here is another post after that, 25 minutes after I revealed the author:
here
Your credibility is shot on this issue, man. I can't believe that you'd misrepresent what I said like that, just like you misrepresented the data to say that 1934 was the hottest year on record... for anyone that wants to follow THAT argument, see this post right here, where I called Zappa and Phred out on their peddling of misinformation.
Edited by supernovasky (03/03/08 06:43 PM)
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8099016 - 03/03/08 06:40 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Because it isn't against forum rules to disrespect references or people that are not directly involved in the debate. Calling Zappa a horrid asshole would be wrong. Calling Zappa's wife insane for putting up with such a horrid asshole would also be wrong. Pointing out that Mr.Hansen is a schmuck on the level of Al Gore is a bit childish, but not wrong (against the forum rules). It is our attempt to keep debate from degrading into name calling while avoiding censorship as much as possible.
It seemed to me though that his objection was that I was spouting off ad hominems instead of debating science. Of course, I found it a silly objection, because I certainly didnt call anybody a name (all I did was mention my own experience), but furthermore, the ad hominem attacks in general were weighted more towards the other side of the debate. I'm of the opinion that ALL ad-hominem attacks are bad, they detract from the science. This includes calling people who are not in this debate names, instead of debating the actual issues. Whether or not what they were saying was an ad-hominem attack by forum rules is irrelevant to me, what was relevant to me was whether or not their attacks detracted from the debate and added a logical fallacy (that attacking the man means anything in the scope of attacking the argument).
I would also say that the "Nitwits" and "kool-aid drinkers" were aimed at my side of the debate. Of course, this is a little more substantively an ad-hominem attack than my simple statement that I've been in front of people and given presentations before (especially since that post was in no means an argument, just a casual reply to someone who had mentioned giving presentations and the like).
But note that I tolerated the ad-hominems and the defining of people on my side as "global warmenists" (in their words), without focusing on and deviating to that in this debate thus far.
However, as you see now, the debate seems to have taken a turn for the worst, classifying scientists and scientific organizations as politicians and terrorists. I suppose the "science" part of this debate is over then, right guys?
If it will get to that point, Seuss, perhaps you SHOULD close the thread. After all, all of the relevant data has been posted, people can certainly read through the last 6 pages and make up their own minds on the issue, before this does get to that point.
Edited by supernovasky (03/03/08 06:49 PM)
|
carbonhoots
old hand
Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,321
Loc: BC Canada
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8100081 - 03/03/08 11:30 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
This thread belongs in the hall of fame.
--------------------
-I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8100113 - 03/03/08 11:41 PM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alright, man, what's your problem?
"hows about you talk about the argument"?
I would think after the last 6 pages, this would be the WEAKEST criticism of my posts. That I have not been arguing the science.
As far as me saying I've had to give a talk/presentation, I was merely responding to someone talking about giving scientific presentations and how if these guys tried to bring their data in a conference, they'd be laughed out of the room.
As far as disclosing what my position in life is or who I am, I prefer to keep that private on a DRUG FORUM.
And as far as the arrogance, I am sorry if I am coming across as arrogant. I am just a bit angered at false claims and deliberate misrepresentation of data.
Also, I find it suspect that you call me out for saying THIS, which can perhaps, in the most liberal definition of the word, be called ad-hominem, but you do not call out these quotes by those who have been arguing against global warming:
I wasn't responding to your posts where you put forth evidence, I was responding to the posts where you presume others don't have insight into "science" and couldn't hack it in "science".
And I gues syou could call your rhetoric as akin to an appeal to authority. You cite yourself as someone who deals with science, and presume others aren't- and none of this matters. When you claim that you better understand science and have to give reports, et cet. When you bring your own education and experiences to bear on the argument, it would seem that you should disclose what those are. But of course, it doesn't matter anyways.
You've thrown out a bunch of journals, then claimed they could be located via electronic databases, such as Ebsco's product, and presume that others don't have access or aren't using these resources...
And as for zappa, who cares? I was talking about you, not him. For what its worth, I've gotten used to zappa's rhetoric, and I don't think he believes it to be relevant to the conversation either, when he mentions "kool aid drinkers", et cet. But he's also been here longer and people are used to him, and he also can take the same criticism he dishes out.
But for what its worth, I enjoy your posts, and you shouldn't take my comments personally.
I just don't think its appropriate for you to presume others here don't understand logic/ scientific methods, and to buttress your arguments with your own life experiences without disclosing what those are. And I don't think its cool for you to presume I don't believe in anthropogenic global warming when I've not said that.
Personally, I'm agnositc. I believe the world is getting warmer. I'm not convinced its unusual or signifigantly dependant on human activity. I used to whole-heartedly believe in it, but now I'm not so sure. Perhpas if I did more research I'd have a different opinion, but so far I've not been presented with anything allowing me to conclude that humans are the cause with any certainty. Luckily I'm not called upon to make policy in this area.
(and I still don't think your references are available via the common databases)
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: johnm214]
#8100177 - 03/04/08 12:09 AM (8 months, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
And I gues syou could call your rhetoric as akin to an appeal to authority. You cite yourself as someone who deals with science, and presume others aren't- and none of this matters. When you claim that you better understand science and have to give reports, et cet. When you bring your own education and experiences to bear on the argument, it would seem that you should disclose what those are. But of course, it doesn't matter anyways.
Appeal to authority would be a more understandable charge. I still would say that I was not aiming for that effect, and was just making conversation outside of the argument, but I can see how you could come to that conclusion.
Quote:
You've thrown out a bunch of journals, then claimed they could be located via electronic databases, such as Ebsco's product, and presume that others don't have access or aren't using these resources...
You are right in saying that not all of them could be located by Ebsco, but those that are not locatable, it isnt that hard to find by going to the respective journal's website, or looking them up in a library database. The IPCC reports are open to the public. But once agian, I will concede this too. I don't mind making concessions like this, as it is something that stems from a personal mistake, but I simply will not concede the science.
Quote:
And as for zappa, who cares? I was talking about you, not him. For what its worth, I've gotten used to zappa's rhetoric, and I don't think he believes it to be relevant to the conversation either, when he mentions "kool aid drinkers", et cet. But he's also been here longer and people are used to him, and he also can take the same criticism he dishes out.
I know, Zappa's been here for a while and probably solidified his threshold enough to say whatever he wants. However, many of the things he said (comparing the IPCC to a terrorist organization, calling Hansen a bull shit artist, refering to "kool-aid drinkers" (obviously us, those who believe global warming is anthropogenic), do not really jive with the science that I have presented openly to anyone willing to listen. Furthermore, I found his misinformation and lies presented (and repudiated) here outright egregious and disingenuous.
Quote:
But for what its worth, I enjoy your posts, and you shouldn't take my comments personally.
I'm sorry if I appeared like I was taking them personally. Sometimes I can get a bit animated over the debate, and I erroneously lumped you in with Phred and Zappa.
Quote:
I'm not convinced its unusual or signifigantly dependant on human activity. I used to whole-heartedly believe in it, but now I'm not so sure. Perhpas if I did more research I'd have a different opinion, but so far I've not been presented with anything allowing me to conclude that humans are the cause with any certainty. Luckily I'm not called upon to make policy in this area.
I am one who is convinced that it is dependent on human activity, and unusual. After plenty of research in the matter, along with the fundamental theories behind CO2 trapping heat as written by Arrhenius, Plass, Callender, and others since then, and watching the CO2 graph with respect to temperature, especially in modern times (in comparison to solar irradiance and sunspots), it would seem foolish to discount the effect that CO2 emissions have on our environment. Sure, the science isn't completely clear, but it is not as muddied as some in this forum would have you suggest.
And to everyone else who has not, read the last few pages of this debate. Read from around page 12. Seek education on this matter, it is a matter of UTMOST importance to yourself and your children. It is a problem that WILL NOT go away, and if anything, the world deserves your education on this matter. The science is long, tough, and complex, but it is something that can be built on as you start from basics and work your way up.
Edited by supernovasky (03/04/08 12:13 AM)
|
Viveka
Architecturer
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 1,911
Last seen: 3 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8100538 - 03/04/08 05:04 AM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
refering to "kool-aid drinkers" (obviously us, those who believe global warming is anthropogenic)
Is that what Science is for, reinforcing belief?
--------------------
Throw out your gold teeth and see how they roll
The answer they reveal - life is unreal
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: Viveka]
#8101090 - 03/04/08 10:45 AM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Is that what Science is for, reinforcing belief?
No, science is a way to take "belief" out of the picture. I said belief because I didn't want to piss anyone off by saying "accept." Truthfully, I do believe that it's a matter of accepting the evidence, rather than believing it.
|
boomer q
Comrade General
Registered: 05/03/07
Posts: 1,036
Loc: Dirty Jersey
Last seen: 8 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: Viveka]
#8101142 - 03/04/08 11:06 AM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
i have a question for the global warming deniers, even though my previous posts in which i quoted IPCC reports and such were completely ignored by those to whom it was directed, what is it gonna take to prove to you that humans have an impact on the climate? is it really gonna take just one scientific paper with the conclusion that there is a causal relationship between CO2 and warming? because from what ive seen, you deniers will probabally just attack the author and say that hes a quack and a bad scientist, and such, so it seems to me that no matter what scientific evidence is presented, youll just keep on denying..... will it take another 10 years of warming? how many degrees does the temp have to go up for you to believe? is it gonna be after we run out of oil? it just seems to me that global warming deniers are only interested in proving to themselves that no matter what they do, or we as humans do, we bear no responsibility whatsoever for the welfare of our planet. its warming? so what, ts probably the sun, just keep burnin that oil, we've got no control over the climate...
thats just the way it comes across to me
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: boomer q]
#8101175 - 03/04/08 11:17 AM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
i have a question for the global warming deniers, even though my previous posts in which i quoted IPCC reports and such were completely ignored by those to whom it was directed, what is it gonna take to prove to you that humans have an impact on the climate? is it really gonna take just one scientific paper with the conclusion that there is a causal relationship between CO2 and warming? because from what ive seen, you deniers will probabally just attack the author and say that hes a quack and a bad scientist, and such, so it seems to me that no matter what scientific evidence is presented, youll just keep on denying..... will it take another 10 years of warming? how many degrees does the temp have to go up for you to believe? is it gonna be after we run out of oil? it just seems to me that global warming deniers are only interested in proving to themselves that no matter what they do, or we as humans do, we bear no responsibility whatsoever for the welfare of our planet. its warming? so what, ts probably the sun, just keep burnin that oil, we've got no control over the climate...
I posted for them about 30 of those papers that come to that conclusion. Heck, one of them practically had the conclusion in the title of the paper. However, moreso than just posting sources, I used them to debate and inform people on the science. I know you've probably read the last 6 pages or so, but no matter the results of our debate, the debate has already been had in the scientific community. The peer reviewed papers? They are the results of that debate.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 10,936
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 hours, 51 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: boomer q]
#8101392 - 03/04/08 12:25 PM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
i have a question for the global warming deniers, even though my previous posts in which i quoted IPCC reports and such were completely ignored by those to whom it was directed, what is it gonna take to prove to you that humans have an impact on the climate?
Do humans have an impact on global climate? Probably. Almost certainly, I would say. That's not the point. The point is that no one can answer this simple question -- how significant is that impact?
There's actually a second question no one can answer -- is that impact beneficial on the whole or negative on the whole -- but until the first question is answered the second is pretty meaningless.
What causes such immense merriment to open-minded people like Diploid and Viveka and Seuss and Zap and myself is how utterly earnest and absolutely convinced those who claim "the science is settled" are about how we must significantly impoverish ourselves today because maybe -- if the myriad computer models (none of which agree with one another) are correct -- half a century or so down the road the rich folks with expensive beachfront property might have to either build a seawall or move their houses back a hundred feet or so to keep their lawns from being burned by salt spray.
I must point out again (though the Warmenists will again ignore it) that prior to 1880 the Earth's temperature changed many, many times by a lot more than a degree Fahrenheit in a lot less than 120 years. What mechanism was responsible for all those hundreds (or thousands or tens of thousands) of swings of more than a degree? It sure as shit wasn't human activity. Even the Warmenists have to admit that.
Despite this admission, the Warmenists continue to insist that the first ten thousand times the Earth warmed it was because of natural mechanisms, but the ten-thousand-and-first time the Earth warmed it was because of human activity. That's as logical as me tossing a pebble at a streetlight, observing that a few seconds later it turns from red to green, and then insisting to all my buddies that it was my pebble that caused the light to change, and that any of them who reject my pebble hypothesis are "deniers", even when every single one of us knows that damn light has been changing from green to red and back again over and over from the first day it was installed at the intersection.
I'm getting pretty tired of rehashing all this crap for the seven hundredth time on this forum. The question of whether or not the Earth is warming is not a political question. This discussion really belongs in the Science and Technology forum, along with the other seven hundred previous global warming threads. Unless someone can add some kind of political tie-in to the discussion, I might as well lock it.
Phred
--------------------
|
supernovasky
Scientist
Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 1,472
Last seen: 3 hours, 27 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: supernovasky]
#8101419 - 03/04/08 12:29 PM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
|
fireworks_god
Sexy ButtMcDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 20,453
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 16 hours, 53 minutes
|
Re: Global warming is killing us all! AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! [Re: Phred]
#8101476 - 03/04/08 12:53 PM (8 months, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Phred said:
What causes such immense merriment to open-minded people like..... Zap ......
--------------------
 
Meet me in outer space
We could spend the night;
watch the earth come up 
I've grown tired of that place;
won't you come with me?
We could start again.
 
| |
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
