First Prev
of 8
Next Last
Uncommoncets

Fitchburg, MA

#142 Sep 29, 2013
test
Uncommoncets

Fitchburg, MA

#143 Sep 29, 2013
When President Obama came into office the average gas price was $1.85 and the unemployment rate would rise above %7 if the stimulus was not passed. 1 Trillion dollars!
Obama called Bush "unpatriotic and irresponsible" for raising the national debt 4 Trillion in 8 years.
Obama claims he's cut the deficit in half. When He took office the debt was 9 Trillion and 5 years later the debt is 17 TRILLION!
The price of gas is an average of $3.60! up from $1.85.
When President Obama was elected he had control of both houses. He could pass anything he wanted so INSTEAD of helping the MIDDLECLASS by creating JOBS and cutting spending like he campaigned on He spent 2 TRILLION dollars, Never passed a budget. Instead He focused on the "affordable care act" aka OBAMACARE.
Jtn

Concord, MA

#144 Sep 29, 2013
Everyone on this site including me are nuts. I am a nut and I have two nuts.
Uncommoncets

Fitchburg, MA

#145 Sep 29, 2013
Let's not forget Al Gore Sold his network "current" to AL Jazeera! He made 500 MILLION.
Jtn

Concord, MA

#146 Sep 29, 2013
What about me? I want attention.
LoLbama

Fitchburg, MA

#147 Sep 30, 2013
At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest. So modest, indeed, that it has fallen outside the lowest parameters of the IPCC’s prediction range. The computer models, in short, are bunk.

To a few distinguished scientists, this will hardly come as news. For years they have insisted that “sensitivity”– the degree to which the climate responds to increases in atmospheric CO2 – is far lower than the computer models imagined. In the past, their voices have been suppressed by the bluster and skulduggery we saw exposed in the Climategate emails. From grant-hungry science institutions and environmentalist pressure groups to carbon traders, EU commissars, and big businesses with their snouts in the subsidies trough, many vested interests have much to lose should the global warming gravy train be derailed.

This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean, it cannot come up with a convincing explanation why. Coming from a sceptical blog none of this would be surprising. But from the IPCC, it’s dynamite: the equivalent of the Soviet politburo announcing that command economies may not after all be the most efficient way of allocating resources.
OK will do

Woburn, MA

#148 Sep 30, 2013
LoLbama wrote:
At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest. So modest, indeed, that it has fallen outside the lowest parameters of the IPCC’s prediction range. The computer models, in short, are bunk.
To a few distinguished scientists, this will hardly come as news. For years they have insisted that “sensitivity”– the degree to which the climate responds to increases in atmospheric CO2 – is far lower than the computer models imagined. In the past, their voices have been suppressed by the bluster and skulduggery we saw exposed in the Climategate emails. From grant-hungry science institutions and environmentalist pressure groups to carbon traders, EU commissars, and big businesses with their snouts in the subsidies trough, many vested interests have much to lose should the global warming gravy train be derailed.
This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean, it cannot come up with a convincing explanation why. Coming from a sceptical blog none of this would be surprising. But from the IPCC, it’s dynamite: the equivalent of the Soviet politburo announcing that command economies may not after all be the most efficient way of allocating resources.
Typical, regurgitate the same LIES over again.
OK will do

Gardner, MA

#149 Nov 1, 2013
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2013/11...

Something like a funded EPA!!!!!!!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Fitchburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Stop stalking me and my family 2 hr Billybob 132
Time to get a Job 21 hr kathy 7
So, let's talk about Jeff Bean (Sep '11) Sat Karen 41
Lynch for Mayor - deemed "Not Credible" (Aug '11) Fri Vincent 207
Scientific Journal Just Released Feb 5 Billybob 10
Review: Fitchburg Tattoo Co (Apr '10) Feb 5 Big brother Joey 34
News Ex-Fitchburg police officer loses appeal of firing Feb 5 Andrew McDonough 23
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Fitchburg Mortgages