Rise in sea level can't be stopped: scientists

Jul 1, 2012 Full story: The Republic 110

Rising sea levels cannot be stopped over the next several hundred years, even if deep emissions cuts lower global average temperatures, but they can be slowed down, climate scientists said in a study on Sunday.

Full Story
Senator Inbred INHOFE

Tulsa, OK

#41 Jul 31, 2012
Aint no such thing as goble warmin, jus as sure as i lernt to cont my 10 tows and big fat fingas n colig at younivercity of tulsa
YouHelpFixIt

United States

#42 Jul 31, 2012
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
But "steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling" really rises to the bait & becomes ever more chronically racist(even becoming a caricature of himself), when I state accurately that "steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling" is a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig.
Instead of understanding & rejecting his racist being, his strategy is to embrace his sins & hug them tighter. He practices in his retirement how to be all the more racist, hoping that I will tire of delineating his racist center.
It is so important to understand that large percentages of AGW deniers are slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigs. Their corporate lack of education, incredible ego & desire to direct racist hatred, makes victims of many people.
You are babbling again.
uMILPOL

Colorado Springs, CO

#44 Jan 19, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Fourteen degrees accord to the USMC.
EXTRADITION GO THRU RUSSIA, VIOLATION OF RUSSIAN HOST IP
THEN UKRAINE
THEN DISTRICT
THEN KIEV
THEN THE
BY THE TIME ANNETTE MARION EVER SEES HER SISTER, SHE WILL BE DEAD CRIME AGAINST COMMUNISM, THEY DO DO DROP CHARGES., CRIME DEPT OF DEFENSE DID TO THE COUNTRY OF UKRAINE AND RUSSIA, LAST CHARGE 10 YEARS THE COMPLAINT., ANNETTE MARION WILL BE SHOT BY MILITARY AS A SPY.
NO ONE DROPS CHARGES IN THE UKRAINE, IT IS COMMUNISM, DUMB DOD, THIS IS NOT A REPUBLIC OF SETUPS AND MADE UP CHARGES., THIS IS COMMUNISM, AND NOT WHATEVER GOVNT YOU THINK YOU HAVE
ANNETTE MARION IS CHARGED WILL NEVER BE DROPED, AGAINST THE COUNTRY FIRST, THEY GET ANNETTE MARION, CPMS.,OSD, MIL, LOUNDON CTY, WITH HER ADDRESS IN VA. AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND THE WHITE TRUCK, AND SUZIE NAME IS MENTIONED WITH PHILIP AND BRIDGETTE, AND THE OFFICE OF CPMS, DEFINED CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MGMT, SYSTEM, SAME BUILDING AS SOCIEAL SECURITY, ON N OAK STREET, ROSOLYN, VA, AND THEY LIKE RUSSSIA HAS HER PERSONEL FILE, THEHACKING, FOLLOWING, BLIND, HARM, HERE IN VA/MD/DC COLORADO, KANSAS, AND HAS
THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF THE DRONE, NEURAL NETS, AND THE DEVICE., ILLEGAL ENTRY, SO THAT IS ON DOD, AND TRACKPHONE
NEVER BE STOPPED COMMUNISM, COMMMUNISM, LOVE IT LOVE IT STATED GERALD J 'THE WITCH/EVIL WILL BE DEAD SHOT ON SIGHT' AND GERALD, ALBERT NOR YVETTE HAD TO THROW WATER ON THE WITHCH
WICKED EVIL WITCH WILL BE DEAD. SING IT HIGH SINGIT LOW, DING DONG THE WICKED ANNETTE WILL BE DEAD.
MUNCHKINS, UKRAINE MILITARY POLICE, THEY SHOOT WELL.
ANNETTE MARION IS AWAITING EXTRADITION TO UKRAINE FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER
GERALD J
ALBERT T.
EXTRADITION GO THRU RUSSIA, VIOLATION OF RUSSIAN HOST IP
THEN UKRAINE
THEN DISTRICT
THEN KIEV
THEN THE
BY THE TIME ANNETTE MARION EVER SEES HER SISTER, SHE WILL BE DEAD CRIME AGAINST COMMUNISM, THEY DO DO DROP CHARGES., CRIME DEPT OF DEFENSE DID TO THE COUNTRY OF UKRAINE AND RUSSIA, LAST CHARGE 10 YEARS THE COMPLAINT., ANNETTE MARION WILL BE SHOT BY MILITARY AS A SPY.
NO ONE DROPS CHARGES IN THE UKRAINE, IT IS COMMUNISM, DUMB DOD, THIS IS NOT A REPUBLIC OF SETUPS AND MADE UP CHARGES., THIS IS COMMUNISM, AND NOT WHATEVER GOVNT YOU THINK YOU HAVE
ANNETTE MARION IS CHARGED WILL NEVER BE DROPED, AGAINST THE COUNTRY FIRST, THEY GET ANNETTE MARION, CPMS.,OSD, MIL, LOUNDON CTY, WITH HER ADDRESS IN VA. AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND THE WHITE TRUCK, AND SUZIE NAME IS MENTIONED WITH PHILIP AND BRIDGETTE, AND THE OFFICE OF CPMS, DEFINED CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MGMT, SYSTEM, SAME BUILDING AS SOCIEAL SECURITY, ON N OAK STREET, ROSOLYN, VA, AND THEY LIKE RUSSSIA HAS HER PERSONEL FILE, THEHACKING, FOLLOWING, BLIND, HARM, HERE IN VA/MD/DC COLORADO, KANSAS, AND HAS
THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF THE DRONE, NEURAL NETS, AND THE DEVICE., ILLEGAL ENTRY, SO THAT IS ON DOD, AND TRACKPHONE
NEVER BE STOPPED COMMUNISM, COMMMUNISM, LOVE IT LOVE IT STATED GERALD J 'THE WITCH/EVIL WILL BE DEAD SHOT ON SIGHT' AND GERALD, ALBERT NOR YVETTE HAD TO THROW WATER ON THE WITHCH
WICKED EVIL WITCH WILL BE DEAD. SING IT HIGH SINGIT LOW, DING DONG THE WICKED ANNETTE WILL BE DEAD.
MUNCHKINS, UKRAINE MILITARY POLICE, THEY SHOOT WELL.
ANNETTE MARION IS AWAITING EXTRADITION TO UKRAINE FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER
GERALD J
ALBERT T.
UKRAINE MILITARY POLICE AND CHARGES TAKES UP TO 5 YRS FOR EXTRADITION 2
JULY 4 2011 OUR SISTER WENT TO THE UKRAINE AMERICAN EMBASSY AND THEY TOLD HER HOW AND WHO EXTRDITES ANNETTE MARION.JULY 4 2011 OUR SISTER WENT TO THE UKRAINE AMERICAN EMBASSY AND THEY TOLD HER HOW AND WHO EXTRDITES ANNETTE MARION.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#45 Jan 19, 2013
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text> You are babbling again.
You babbled yourself out of here.

Still a denier, why you just dropped without adios? Your buddies dropped like flies, too.

You are not missed at all.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#46 Jan 19, 2013
A summary on the sealevel rise:

Progress has been made in recent years in understanding the observed past sea-level rise. As a result, process-based projections of future sea-level rise have become dramatically higher and are now closer to semi-empirical projections. However, process-based models still underestimate past sea-level rise, and they still project a smaller rise than semi-empirical models.

[from:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives... ]
PHD

Overton, TX

#47 Jan 20, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
A summary on the sealevel rise:
Progress has been made in recent years in understanding the observed past sea-level rise. As a result, process-based projections of future sea-level rise have become dramatically higher and are now closer to semi-empirical projections. However, process-based models still underestimate past sea-level rise, and they still project a smaller rise than semi-empirical models.
[from:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives... ]
More scientific science fiction useless cut and paste BS. Will it ever end?

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#48 Jan 20, 2013
LoL wrote:
<quoted text>
WHY DIDN'T YOU or ANYONE AT YOUR CHURCH REALIZE THAT Dr.s MANN, JONES, BRIFFA, and others were using M.A.G.I.C.A.L. H.O.C.K.E.Y. S.T.I.C.K. BORE-HOLE MATH that MAKES HOCKEY STICKS from
CALIBRATION DATA?
WHY DIDN'T YOU or ANYONE at AL GORE'S CHURCH of ALTERNATE ENERGY
RECOGNIZE that M.A.G.I.C.A.L. T.R.E.E.M.O.M.I.T.U.R.S.
are MAKE BELIEVE?
YOU DIDN'T REALIZE because YOU are ILL EDUCATED LIBTARDS who WOULD BELIEVE AREA 51/BIGFOOT if SOMEONE DIDN'T FORCE YOU to SITES where such DRIVEL is
POSTED as INTERNET CHERCH SIGNTS.
Hey Wingnut.

The NAS (National Academy of Science) was asked by Congress to veriy the hockey stick.

Their analysis concluded it was reliable with a HIGH degree of certainty for the last 400, and probable for the previous 600 years with less certainty [only because of the time period].

They concluded this because OTHER proxy studies showed roughly the same shape as Mann did.

And the earlier critiques on statistics, they were all proven to be immaterial, even nonexistant.

You mean you didn't hear about that in your lying anti-science right wing press.

Ask me for a citation, if you care.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#49 Jan 21, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
A summary on the sealevel rise:
Progress has been made in recent years in understanding the observed past sea-level rise. As a result, process-based projections of future sea-level rise have become dramatically higher and are now closer to semi-empirical projections. However, process-based models still underestimate past sea-level rise, and they still project a smaller rise than semi-empirical models.
[from:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives... ]
Progrss? Projections? More like another case of even though the last models we wrote were wrong and departed from reality within years you need to trust us this time.

The fact that they call it semi-empirical models is another way of saying our last models were wrong. That we really didn't base these on past observations but instead of what we thing was right even though it turned out they were wrong last time

Maybe if they tested those models properly which would mean feeding them historical data and have them predict current sea levels and compare that with actual sea level they would see that those models would have downtown Boston with carp swimming the streets instead of the truth which is those streets were fish free last year.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#50 Jan 21, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Wingnut.
The NAS (National Academy of Science) was asked by Congress to veriy the hockey stick.
Their analysis concluded it was reliable with a HIGH degree of certainty for the last 400, and probable for the previous 600 years with less certainty [only because of the time period].
They concluded this because OTHER proxy studies showed roughly the same shape as Mann did.
And the earlier critiques on statistics, they were all proven to be immaterial, even nonexistant.
You mean you didn't hear about that in your lying anti-science right wing press.
Ask me for a citation, if you care.
Do you even listen to what you just said. They based there analysis on other proxy studies made that claim. Given that half of the studies published according to a study on studies had a serious error that would mean that they based the whole thing on nothing more than bull.

I would be willing to bet that your citation is over five years old which means that it was one of those who supported AGW before the wave of studies that debunked AGW. I would even be willing to bet one of those studies that supported it was the IPCC AR4 which was discovered to riddled with serious errors and a few outright lies. In other words the NAS was wrong again.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#51 Jan 21, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you even listen to what you just said. They based there analysis on other proxy studies made that claim.
They were INDEPENDANT proxy studies -- of different types of proxies.

Tsk Tsk. I gave you the link -- lol, you didn't open it?

the other proxies included ice cores, bore holes, and mixtures by primarily other researches than Mann. here is the link... again to the NAS study. The other pages show their summary conclusion -- which was in Mann's favor.

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php...

Guess you want to keep those eyes tight shut.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Given that half of the studies published according to a study on studies had a serious error that would mean that they based the whole thing on nothing more than bull.
I showed you the critics backed off. The claims of there being a statistical error were wrong.

Now, I'm sure on your beloved right wing sites they would claim the moon is made of green cheese and you would BELIEVE it. LOL.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
I would be willing to bet that your citation is over five years old which means that it was one of those who supported AGW before the wave of studies that debunked AGW.
Why dear. It would be SOOOOOO easy for you to prove. Surely you can find ONE world renown science agency [one on my list -- I'll put it out for you next] to prove what you just said.

Shouldn't you want to find out the real truth, then believe crazy conspiracy stories? We'll agree it shouldn't be the IPCC -- they just compile science research anyway -- they don't initiate it.

Don't come back until you prove your case, else admit you're wrong ok?
I won't hold my breadth. LOL.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#52 Jan 21, 2013
Ah, I see ObamaSucks was here and his 15 aliases.

Characteristics: The 16 block votes always show up within 5 minutes. Usually its on one of his own posts. Since I noted this, he's lurking on a few posts. He must like Tina. LOL.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#53 Jan 21, 2013
Here is that list, Tina:

**Organizations that say AGW is a FACT**
U.S. Agency for International Development
United States Department of Agriculture
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
United States Department of Defense
United States Department of Energy
National Institutes of Health
United States Department of State
United States Department of Transportation
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Smithsonian Institution
International Arctic Science Committee
Arctic Council
African Academy of Sciences
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences
and the Arts
Academia Brasileira de Ciéncias
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Royal Society of Canada
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Académie des Sciences, France
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina
of Germany
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Accademia nazionale delle scienze of Italy
Indian National Science Academy
Science Council of Japan
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Madagascar's National Academy of Arts,
Letters and Sciences
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society of New Zealand
Polish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques
du Sénégal
Academy of Science of South Africa
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
The Royal Society of the United Kingdom
National Academy of Sciences, United States
Zambia Academy of Sciences
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association for the Advancement
of Science
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Medical Association
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Society of Agronomy
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Botanical Society of America
Crop Science Society of America
Ecological Society of America
Federation of American Scientists
Geological Society of America
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Society of American Foresters
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Engineers Australia
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of Australia
British Antarctic Survey
Institute of Biology, UK
Royal Meteorological Society, UK
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#54 Jan 21, 2013
Don't use this list, Tina.

**Organizations that say AGW is a FRAUD**

American Petroleum Institute
US Chamber of Commerce
National Association of Manufacturers
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Industrial Minerals Association
National Cattlemen's Beef Association
Great Northern Project Development
Rosebud Mining
Massey Energy
Alpha Natural Resources
Southeastern Legal Foundation
Georgia Agribusiness Council
Georgia Motor Trucking Association
Corn Refiners Association
National Association of Home Builders
National Oilseed Processors Association
National Petrochemical and Refiners Association
Western States Petroleum Association
National Agnotology Producers Association
The Astroturfing Consortium
litesong

Everett, WA

#55 Jan 21, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
Ah, I see ObamaSucks was here and his 15 aliases..... He must like Tina.
Must be Muskrat Love.
PHD

Overton, TX

#56 Jan 21, 2013
Pinheadlitesout wrote:
<quoted text>
I Must be A Muskrat.
No must be there.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#57 Jan 23, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
They were INDEPENDANT proxy studies -- of different types of proxies.
Tsk Tsk. I gave you the link -- lol, you didn't open it?
the other proxies included ice cores, bore holes, and mixtures by primarily other researches than Mann. here is the link... again to the NAS study. The other pages show their summary conclusion -- which was in Mann's favor.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php...
Guess you want to keep those eyes tight shut.
<quoted text>
I showed you the critics backed off. The claims of there being a statistical error were wrong.
Now, I'm sure on your beloved right wing sites they would claim the moon is made of green cheese and you would BELIEVE it. LOL.
<quoted text>
Why dear. It would be SOOOOOO easy for you to prove. Surely you can find ONE world renown science agency [one on my list -- I'll put it out for you next] to prove what you just said.
Shouldn't you want to find out the real truth, then believe crazy conspiracy stories? We'll agree it shouldn't be the IPCC -- they just compile science research anyway -- they don't initiate it.
Don't come back until you prove your case, else admit you're wrong ok?
I won't hold my breadth. LOL.
Of course you keep your eyes tightly closed. The fact that those same people once published similar documents making similar claimse about an approaching ice age in the seventies only proves that they publish what ever support to political climate.

Of course the real issue is all it takes is one proxy measurement to be off and the whole thing is wrong. Notice that they relied on ice cores which means much of the evidence has since melted since the end of the last ice age. They ignore ocean cores which of course show an entirely different story.

Funny thing is when you look at the bigger picture, not just the last two thousand years you discover that the earth has been warmer than it is now.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#58 Jan 23, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
Here is that list, Tina:
**Organizations that say AGW is a FACT**
U.S. Agency for International Development
United States Department of Agriculture
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
United States Department of Defense
United States Department of Energy
National Institutes of Health
United States Department of State
United States Department of Transportation
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Smithsonian Institution
International Arctic Science Committee
Arctic Council
African Academy of Sciences
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences
and the Arts
Academia Brasileira de Ciéncias
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Royal Society of Canada
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Académie des Sciences, France
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina
of Germany
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Accademia nazionale delle scienze of Italy
Indian National Science Academy
Science Council of Japan
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Madagascar's National Academy of Arts,
Letters and Sciencesl'Académie des Sciences et Techniques
du Sénégal
Academy of Science of South Africa
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
The Royal Society of the United Kingdom
National Academy of Sciences, United States
Zambia Academy of Sciences
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association for the Advancement
of Science
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Medical Association
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Society of Agronomy
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Botanical Society of America
Crop Science Society of America
Ecological Society of America
Federation of American Scientists
Geological Society of America
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Society of American Foresters
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Engineers Australia
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of Australia
British Antarctic Survey
Institute of Biology, UK
Royal Meteorological Society, UKEuropean Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Wikipedia needs to update their list. I saw several that have already reverse position after the 2008 findings. And several others like the IPCC who are now not considered to be all that reliable now. The Chinese are no longer on board either.

It it just me or does it seem that this list is filled with government agencies relying on government funding. Not to mention the Nigerian and Carrabean Academy of Sciences. Sounds like part of the list could be brought cheap as well.
PHD

Overton, TX

#59 Jan 23, 2013
Their eyes are wide open to scientific science fiction cut and paste useless babble. They never show their own published work.Ever wonder why?

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#60 Jan 23, 2013
PHD wrote:
Their eyes are wide open to scientific science fiction cut and paste useless babble. They never show their own published work.Ever wonder why?
What I notice is how many receive most or all of their funding from a government or in the IPCC's case governments. Which means that they are affected by the political climate and tend to produce the results that will garner them an increase in funding.
PHD

Overton, TX

#61 Jan 23, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
What I notice is how many receive most or all of their funding from a government or in the IPCC's case governments. Which means that they are affected by the political climate and tend to produce the results that will garner them an increase in funding.
Oh how true your statemt is.Keep it up you do a fine job spanking the scientific science fiction cut and paste useless babble.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Global Warming Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 14 min Karma is a_______ 51,404
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 34 min Bob J 1440 33,932
Global Warming Standup Comedy (Apr '07) 52 min Religion of Climate 3,670
Scientists witness carbon dioxide trapping heat... 1 hr Fair Game 21
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 1 hr IBdaMann 4,124
Most Americans see combating climate change as ... 4 hr The Fact Is 2
Global Warming "PREDICTIONS" 4 hr The Fact Is 122
More from around the web