Who still takes global warming seriously?

Full story: Farmington Daily Times

Despite the recent discovery of the e-mails that resulted in "Climate Gate" and the fact this has been one of the coldest and harshest winters in many years, Gov.
Comments
30,101 - 30,120 of 30,821 Comments Last updated Jun 9, 2013
gcaveman1

Laurel, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31385
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Chan, PHuD, Larch Languid, Bill G:

Do you have opinions? Yes.

Do you have pointless comments? Yes.

Do you have any scientific evidence to back up your opinions and comments?

(crickets chirping)
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31386
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

gcaveman1 wrote:
....... PHuD.......
Do you have opinions? Yes.
gcaveman1...... I disagree with you.'phud fetid feces face fiend' has no opinion, just copies someone's opinion.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31387
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
gcaveman1...... I disagree with you.'phud fetid feces face fiend' has no opinion, just copies someone's opinion.
And you think topix doesn’t know what you publish? Attacks on me won't delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31388
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

gcaveman1 wrote:
Chan, PHuD, Larch Languid, Bill G:
Do you have opinions? Yes.
Do you have pointless comments? Yes.
Do you have any scientific evidence to back up your opinions and comments?
(crickets chirping)
No more evidence than the useless scientific science fiction you spew all day.(Crickets chirping back at you)

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31389
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the nutcase who regularly quotes from WattsUp and ClimateDepot.
"Climate Depot" run by Marc Moreno - the former Inhofe staffer who was behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacks on Kerry? The one who was a producer on Rush Limbaugh's show from 92-96? He's a paid lobbyist and a hack. Can we trust him to accurately quote a thousand scientists? Can we believe that he hasn't quote mined extensively?
By the way... you RAN OFF, when I challenged you to find me that "other NASA website" including with the official logo of NASA, that said they didn't agree global warming was happening...
Remember??????????
Of course this is the official NASA view on global warming.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
Just like you quote from those sources of fiction also known as skepticalscince and realscience which ironically feature no skepticism and no real science. And I found you people who work at NASA who are climate scientist and all you have is a web page approved by an administrator.

You seem to only have one site you can debunk and your main claim that the person running it has political connections. Yet want to claim that the AAAS which is nothing but a lobbist group and has more people wandering the hill than conducting science is not. Hey, if your looking for a site to debunk then maybe you should try junkscience.com .

Of course no one can win with your double standard. But the real benifit for people like me is how you rattle on with such few sources.

As for running off, I am still here if you haven't notice.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31390
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like you quote from those sources of fiction also known as skepticalscince and realscience which ironically feature no skepticism and no real science.
RealScience in particular is well known as the #1 climatology website. They have the top climatolotists participating there, plus I have seen top skeptic interacting too.

Per Wikipedia:

Skeptical Science has become a well-known resource for people seeking to understand or debate climate change, and has been praised for its straightforwardness.[11] Marine biologist Ove Hoegh-Guldberg has described it as "the most prominent knowledge-based website dealing with climate change in the world",[12] and The Washington Post has praised it as the "most prominent and detailed" website to counter arguments by global warming skeptics.[13] In September 2011, the site won the 2011 Eureka Prize from the Australian Museum in the category of Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge.[14]

So no surprises the Queen of lying right wing sites would have none of this.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

And I found you people who work at NASA who are climate scientist and all you have is a web page approved by an administrator.
If that were true, NASA wouldn't have been on record officially as supporting global warming under the Bush administration.

Caught you lying again, didn't I.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

You seem to only have one site you can debunk and your main claim that the person running it has political connections.
No. All the websites that have NASA on them and show their official logo on the topic of global warming are strongly in favor of global warming.

Which means you told a BIG lie when you claimed recently:

TINA ANNE: The fact that you still believe in AGW after all this time really is a peek into your mind. After all, AGW stopped being a theory in 2008.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
As for running off, I am still here if you haven't notice.
You took that out of context. The running off, meant you didn't honestly respond to that.

Yes, you have now responded -- but you did it with MORE lies about it.
I challenged you to find me a site with an official NASA logo that took your position.

and all you can do is try and smoke up the room with your lies.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31391
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Saint_ wrote:
..... quit bickering about whether Global Warming is real and get real.
AGW scientists with 10-16 years more education than toxic topix AGW deniers, have the science that shows that man-unkind is undoing the climate.

It is toxic topix AGW deniers who bicker, WITHOUT any integrated peer-reviewed body of science to back up the exxon, energy, & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom politically produced Pee-R propaganda.

If Saint don't wanta oppose toxic topix, exxon, energy, & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom politically produced Pee-R propaganda pablum, then he can quit trying to be a referee who doesn't believe in science.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31392
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
AGW scientists with 10-16 years more education than toxic topix AGW deniers, have the science that shows that man-unkind is undoing the climate.
It is toxic topix AGW deniers who bicker, WITHOUT any integrated peer-reviewed body of science to back up the exxon, energy, & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom politically produced Pee-R propaganda.
If Saint don't wanta oppose toxic topix, exxon, energy, & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom politically produced Pee-R propaganda pablum, then he can quit trying to be a referee who doesn't believe in science.
And you think topix doesn’t know what you publish? Attacks on me won't delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
suxsux

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31393
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

http://www.acclimatise.uk.com/index.php...

Executive Summary
This report provides a snapshot of recent scientific literature and new analyses of likely impacts and risks that would be asso- ciated with a 4° Celsius warming within this century. It is a rigorous attempt to outline a range of risks, focusing on developing countries and especially the poor. A 4°C world would be one of unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods in many regions, with serious impacts on ecosystems and associated services. But with action, a 4°C world can be avoided and we can likely hold warming below 2°C.
&#65532;Without further commitments and action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the world is likely to warm by more than 3°C above the preindustrial climate. Even with the current mitigation commitments and pledges fully implemented, there is roughly a 20 percent likelihood of exceeding 4°C by 2100. If they are not met, a warming of 4°C could occur as early as the 2060s. Such a warming level and associated sea-level rise of 0.5 to 1 meter, or more, by 2100 would not be the end point: a further warming to levels over 6°C, with several meters of sea-level rise, would likely occur over the following centuries.
Thus, while the global community has committed itself to holding warming below 2°C to prevent “dangerous” climate change, and Small Island Developing states (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have identified global warming of 1.5°C as warming above which there would be serious threats to their own development and, in some cases, survival, the sum total of current policies—in place and pledged—will very likely lead to warming far in excess of these levels. Indeed, present emission trends put the world plausibly on a path toward 4°C warming within the century.
This report is not a comprehensive scientific assessment, as will be forthcoming from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2013–14 in its Fifth Assessment Report. It is focused on developing countries, while recognizing that developed countries are also vulnerable and at serious risk of major damages from climate change. A series of recent extreme events worldwide continue to highlight the vulnerability of not only the developing world but even wealthy industrialized countries.
Uncertainties remain in projecting the extent of both climate change and its impacts. We take a risk-based approach in which risk is defined as impact multiplied by probability: an event with low probability can still pose a high risk if it implies serious consequences.
No nation will be immune to the impacts of climate change. However, the distribution of impacts is likely to be inherently unequal and tilted against many of the world’s poorest regions, which have the least economic, institutional, scientific, and tech- nical capacity to cope and adapt. For example:
• Eventhoughabsolutewarmingwillb elargestinhighlatitudes, the warming that will occur in the tropics is larger when com- pared to the historical range of temperature and extremes to which human and natural ecosystems have adapted and coped. The projected emergence of unprecedented high-temperature extremes in the tropics will consequently lead to significantly larger impacts on agriculture and ecosystems.
• Sea-level rise is likely to be 15 to 20 percent larger in the trop- ics than the global mean.
• Increases in tropical cyclone intensity are likely to be felt disproportionately in low-latitude regions.
• Increasing aridity and drought are likely to increase substan- tially in many developing country regions located in tropical and subtropical areas.
A world in which warming reaches 4°C above preindustrial levels (hereafter referred to as a 4°C world), would be one of
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31394
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

So more would be could be scientific science fiction.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31395
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

suxsux wrote:
http://www.acclimatise.uk.com/ index.php?id=9&section=blo g&blog=422
Executive Summary
This report provides a snapshot of recent scientific literature and new analyses of likely impacts and risks that would be associated with a 4° Celsius warming within this century. It is a rigorous attempt to outline a range of risks, focusing on developing countries and especially the poor. A 4°C world would be one of unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods in many regions, with serious impacts on ecosystems and associated services. But with action, a 4°C world can be avoided and we can likely hold warming below 2°C.
Without further commitments and action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the world is likely to warm by more than 3°C above the preindustrial climate. Even with the current mitigation commitments and pledges fully implemented, there is roughly a 20 percent likelihood of exceeding 4°C by 2100. If they are not met, a warming of 4°C could occur as early as the 2060s. Such a warming level and associated sea-level rise of 0.5 to 1 meter, or more, by 2100 would not be the end point: a further warming to levels over 6°C, with several meters of sea-level rise, would likely occur over the following centuries.
Thus, while the global community has committed itself to holding warming below 2°C to prevent “dangerous” climate change, and Small Island Developing states (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have identified global warming of 1.5°C as warming above which there would be serious threats to their own development and, in some cases, survival, the sum total of current policies—in place and pledged—will very likely lead to warming far in excess of these levels. Indeed, present emission trends put the world plausibly on a path toward 4°C warming within the century.

No nation will be immune to the impacts of climate change.• Sea-level rise is likely to be 15 to 20 percent larger in the trop- ics than the global mean.
• Increases in tropical cyclone intensity are likely to be felt disproportionately in low-latitude regions.
• Increasing aridity and drought are likely to increase substan- tially in many developing country regions located in tropical and subtropical areas.
EXCELLENT post, suxsux. I had to delete a bit to leave me room, though - sorry!

I see GordSUXObama has been around with his macros & multiple identities, giving you multiple negative votes.

Like other climatologists, they may want to stay away from the worst case scenarios because they don't want to be seen as alarmists, chicken-little-types they can never trust.

I do think they've underestimated some dangers, though. In the Eemian,~124 Kya, temps were 1-2º C higher than our pre-industrial temps, but sea level was 5-6 meters (odd that your report doesn't say "metres" given its source & other spellings) higher. In the Pliocene ~3 Mya, temps were 2-3º C higher, but sea level was ~25 meters higher.

Estimates are that CO2 had to fall to ~450 PPB so that temps could fall enough to form the Antarctic ice sheet ~34 Mya. We're rocketing toward that level.

So they may be correct about droughts & storms, but sea level rise will probably eventually be many meters higher, not just a few. It just make take a couple of centuries. However, once it starts it'll be inexorable.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31396
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

phud fetid feces face fiend' wrote:
And you think.......
//////////
litesong wrote:
........ that "phud fetid feces face fiend" is stupid, as all toxic topix AGW deniers are stupid. They have to be stupid. They never were able to get mathematics & science degrees. They never were able to take upper class science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc for their poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

But, to be sucked into exxon, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom, Pee-R, propaganda pablum is the most stupid of all their non-actions of life. To pretend science, where there is no science & they never had science.......to make up science, that is nothing but exxon, energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un boardroom, Pee-R, propaganda pablum is their downfall......... & a long long fall it is. Tho their bloody guts are not sprayed all over concrete floors, their wretched brain cells have seized to function, no longer connected to each other.... yes, a long long fall.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31398
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

I see GordSuxObama made a showing, with his other 8 aliases to block anyone voting him down.

Cheaters appear to be welcomed by Topix.
suxsux

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31399
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

page 2
Turn Down The heaT: why a 4°C warmer worlD musT Be avoiDeD

unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods in many regions, with serious impacts on human systems, ecosystems, and associated services.
Warming of 4°C can still be avoided: numerous studies show that there are technically and economically feasible emissions pathways to hold warming likely below 2°C. Thus the level of impacts that developing countries and the rest of the world expe- rience will be a result of government, private sector, and civil society decisions and choices, including, unfortunately, inaction.
Observed Impacts and Changes to the Climate System
The unequivocal effects of greenhouse gas emission–induced change on the climate system, reported by IPCC’s Fourth Assess- ment Report (AR4) in 2007, have continued to intensify, more or less unabated:
• The concentration of the main greenhouse gas, carbon diox- ide (CO2), has continued to increase from its preindustrial concentration of approximately 278 parts per million (ppm) to over 391 ppm in September 2012, with the rate of rise now at 1.8 ppm per year.
• The present CO2 concentration is higher than paleoclimatic and geologic evidence indicates has occurred at any time in the last 15 million years.
• Emissions of CO2 are, at present, about 35,000 million metric tons per year (including land-use change) and, absent further policies, are projected to rise to 41,000 million metric tons of CO2 per year in 2020.
• Global mean temperature has continued to increase and is now about 0.8°C above preindustrial levels.
A global warming of 0.8°C may not seem large, but many climate change impacts have already started to emerge, and the shift from 0.8°C to 2°C warming or beyond will pose even greater challenges. It is also useful to recall that a global mean temperature increase of 4°C approaches the difference between temperatures today and those of the last ice age, when much of central Europe and the northern United States were covered with kilometers of ice and global mean temperatures were about 4.5°C to 7°C lower. And this magnitude of climate change—human induced—is occurring over a century, not millennia.
The global oceans have continued to warm, with about 90 percent of the excess heat energy trapped by the increased green- house gas concentrations since 1955 stored in the oceans as heat. The average increase in sea levels around the world over the 20th century has been about 15 to 20 centimeters. Over the last decade the average rate of sea-level rise has increased to about 3.2 cm per
decade. Should this rate remain unchanged, this would mean over 30 cm of additional sea-level rise in the 21st century.
The warming of the atmosphere and oceans is leading to an accelerating loss of ice from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and this melting could add substantially to sea-level rise in the future. Overall, the rate of loss of ice has more than tripled since the 1993–2003 period as reported in the IPCC AR4, reaching 1.3 cm per decade over 2004–08; the 2009 loss rate is equivalent to about 1.7 cm per decade. If ice sheet loss continues at these rates, without acceleration, the increase in global average sea level due to this source would be about 15 cm by the end of the 21st century. A clear illustration of the Greenland ice sheet’s increasing vulner- ability to warming is the rapid growth in melt area observed since the 1970s. As for Arctic sea ice, it reached a record minimum in September 2012, halving the area of ice covering the Arctic Ocean in summers over the last 30 years.
The effects of global warming are also leading to observed changes in many other climate and environmental aspects of the Earth system.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31400
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

suxsux wrote:
page 2
Turn Down The heaT: why a 4°C warmer worlD musT Be avoiDeD
unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods in many regions, with serious impacts on human systems, ecosystems, and associated services.
Warming of 4°C can still be avoided: numerous studies show that there are technically and economically feasible emissions pathways to hold warming likely below 2°C. Thus the level of impacts that developing countries and the rest of the world expe- rience will be a result of government, private sector, and civil society decisions and choices, including, unfortunately, inaction.
Observed Impacts and Changes to the Climate System
The unequivocal effects of greenhouse gas emission–induced change on the climate system, reported by IPCC’s Fourth Assess- ment Report (AR4) in 2007, have continued to intensify, more or less unabated:
• The concentration of the main greenhouse gas, carbon diox- ide (CO2), has continued to increase from its preindustrial concentration of approximately 278 parts per million (ppm) to over 391 ppm in September 2012, with the rate of rise now at 1.8 ppm per year.
• The present CO2 concentration is higher than paleoclimatic and geologic evidence indicates has occurred at any time in the last 15 million years.
• Emissions of CO2 are, at present, about 35,000 million metric tons per year (including land-use change) and, absent further policies, are projected to rise to 41,000 million metric tons of CO2 per year in 2020.
• Global mean temperature has continued to increase and is now about 0.8°C above preindustrial levels.
A global warming of 0.8°C may not seem large, but many climate change impacts have already started to emerge, and the shift from 0.8°C to 2°C warming or beyond will pose even greater challenges. It is also useful to recall that a global mean temperature increase of 4°C approaches the difference between temperatures today and those of the last ice age, when much of central Europe and the northern United States were covered with kilometers of ice and global mean temperatures were about 4.5°C to 7°C lower. And this magnitude of climate change—human induced—is occurring over a century, not millennia.
The global oceans have continued to warm, with about 90 percent of the excess heat energy trapped by the increased green- house gas concentrations since 1955 stored in the oceans as heat. The average increase in sea levels around the world over the 20th century has been about 15 to 20 centimeters. Over the last decade the average rate of sea-level rise has increased to about 3.2 cm per
decade. Should this rate remain unchanged, this would mean over 30 cm of additional sea-level rise in the 21st century.
The warming of the atmosphere and oceans is leading to an accelerating loss of ice from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and this melting could add substantially to sea-level rise in the future. Overall, the rate of loss of ice has more than tripled since the 1993–2003 period as reported in the IPCC AR4, reaching 1.3 cm per decade over 2004–08; the 2009 loss rate is equivalent to about 1.7 cm per decade. If ice sheet loss continues at these rates, without acceleration, the increase in global average sea level due to this source would be about 15 cm by the end of the 21st century. A clear illustration of the Greenland ice sheet’s increasing vulner- ability to warming is the rapid growth in melt area observed since the 1970s. As for Arctic sea ice, it reached a record minimum in September 2012, halving the area of ice covering the Arctic Ocean in summers over the last 30 years.
The effects of global warming are also leading to observed changes in many other climate and environmental aspects of the Earth system.
You 'bout sum it up, and very succinctly, I might add.

The debate now is about how bad it will be, while the morons here claim it isn't even happening.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31401
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like you quote from those sources of fiction also known as skepticalscince and realscience which ironically feature no skepticism and no real science. And I found you people who work at NASA who are climate scientist and all you have is a web page approved by an administrator.
You seem to only have one site you can debunk and your main claim that the person running it has political connections. Yet want to claim that the AAAS which is nothing but a lobbist group and has more people wandering the hill than conducting science is not. Hey, if your looking for a site to debunk then maybe you should try junkscience.com .
Of course no one can win with your double standard. But the real benifit for people like me is how you rattle on with such few sources.
As for running off, I am still here if you haven't notice.
Oh, honey, you try so hard, but your spelling alone makes you seem like an ignoramus that no one should pay attention to.

Then there's your lack of logic and your endless lies; but that's for another post.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31403
Feb 2, 2013
 

Judged:

5

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You 'bout sum it up, and very succinctly, I might add.
The debate now is about how bad it will be, while the morons here claim it isn't even happening.
Well that would make you a less-on. So do show your entire peer reviewed published work and that bout sum it up less-on.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31404
Feb 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Well that would make you a less-on. So do show your entire peer reviewed published work and that bout sum it up less-on.
I guess you're a mental cripple because the information is out there in this great free land we call America on that great free path we call the information highway.

Can you Google?

But probably all you're capable of, as a mental cripple and a know-nothing nihilist, is making some semi-cutsey juvenile remarks that you think actually say something.
suxsux

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31405
Feb 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Evidence....gotta love it
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
suxsux

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31406
Feb 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

page 3
The effects of global warming are also leading to observed changes in many other climate and environmental aspects of the Earth system. The last decade has seen an exceptional number of extreme heat waves around the world with consequential severe impacts. Human-induced climate change since the 1960s has increased the frequency and intensity of heat waves and thus also likely exacerbated their societal impacts. In some climatic regions, extreme precipitation and drought have increased in intensity and/ or frequency with a likely human influence. An example of a recent extreme heat wave is the Russian heat wave of 2010, which had very significant adverse consequences. Preliminary estimates for the 2010 heat wave in Russia put the death toll at 55,000, annual crop failure at about 25 percent, burned areas at more than 1 million hectares, and economic losses at about US$15 billion (1 percent gross domestic product (GDP)).
In the absence of climate change, extreme heat waves in Europe, Russia, and the United States, for example, would be expected to occur only once every several hundred years. Observations indicate a tenfold increase in the surface area of the planet experiencing extreme heat since the 1950s.
The area of the Earth’s land surface affected by drought has also likely increased substantially over the last 50 years, somewhat faster than projected by climate models. The 2012 drought in the United States impacted about 80 percent of agricultural land, making it the most severe drought since the 1950s.
Negative effects of higher temperatures have been observed on agricultural production, with recent studies indicating that since the 1980s global maize and wheat production may have been reduced significantly compared to a case without climate change.
Effects of higher temperatures on the economic growth of poor countries have also been observed over recent decades, suggesting a significant risk of further reductions in the economic growth in poor countries in the future due to global warming. An MIT study1 used historical fluctuations in temperature within countries
&#65532;xiv
to identify its effects on aggregate economic outcomes. It reported that higher temperatures substantially reduce economic growth in poor countries and have wide-ranging effects, reducing agricultural output, industrial output, and political stability. These findings inform debates over the climate’s role in economic development and suggest the possibility of substantial negative impacts of higher temperatures on poor countries.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Blanco Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Blanco People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Blanco News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Blanco
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••