Who still takes global warming seriou...

Who still takes global warming seriously?

There are 30922 comments on the Farmington Daily Times story from Jan 28, 2010, titled Who still takes global warming seriously?. In it, Farmington Daily Times reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Farmington Daily Times.

PHD

United States

#31108 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, white but not a RACIST as you seem to be.
Do you walk upright or are you still Four-On-The-Floor?
"Four-on-the-floor"? Oh so now you`re the one calling me a nayger monkey? You`re the reason why slavery should be reinstated, Toby.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31109 Jan 22, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>"Four-on-the-floo r"? Oh so now you`re the one calling me a nayger monkey? You`re the reason why slavery should be reinstated, Toby.
Not a "nayger monkey", more like a RACIST Gerbil with an IQ to match.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31110 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSux-- you really are the conspiracy theorist. The IPCC's reasoning is the redistribution of wealth? The IPCC'S is one of the most conservative climate change think tanks out there.

Climate change is a socialist plot? To what end as Canada and most of Europe are already partially socialist countries. Why would they have to implement a socialist plot if they are already socialist? Also, social security, Medicare, the highway system, the library system in the U.S. are by their nature socialist-like programs. They've been in place for quite some time, yet we're still a capitalist society.

As for Maurice Strong, one person speaking out of turn does not discount the thousands of scientists or scientific data.

And finally, the reason people don't want to think about this is called "cognitive dissonance." Some things can be too horrible to acknowledge so the human brain refuses to acknowledge it. To acknowledge it would be to frightening.

Please don't let the D's corner the market on logical thinking on this subject. We R's need to wake up to the reality of this problem. This is not a partisan issue. It's a human issue.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31111 Jan 22, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>From your posts you seem to be black. You know, with an IQ of about 59.
I have to agree with ObamaSux on this. I'm quite surprised by this comment. Why would you suggest that he was black? Or any other race?
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31112 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
ObamaSux-- you really are the conspiracy theorist. The IPCC's reasoning is the redistribution of wealth? The IPCC'S is one of the most conservative climate change think tanks out there.
Climate change is a socialist plot? To what end as Canada and most of Europe are already partially socialist countries. Why would they have to implement a socialist plot if they are already socialist? Also, social security, Medicare, the highway system, the library system in the U.S. are by their nature socialist-like programs. They've been in place for quite some time, yet we're still a capitalist society.
As for Maurice Strong, one person speaking out of turn does not discount the thousands of scientists or scientific data.
And finally, the reason people don't want to think about this is called "cognitive dissonance." Some things can be too horrible to acknowledge so the human brain refuses to acknowledge it. To acknowledge it would be to frightening.
Please don't let the D's corner the market on logical thinking on this subject. We R's need to wake up to the reality of this problem. This is not a partisan issue. It's a human issue.
For your information Canada has been and is moving AWAY From Socialism while the USA has RADICALLY changed under the OBAMA administration.

Yes, during the Pierre Trudeau era, who was a COMMUNIST, and Maurice Strong (CFO of Petro Canada) placed in charge of the attempt to NATIONALIZE the Canadian OIL INDUSTRY, Canada was SOCIALIST.

The complete story is HERE, read it and LEARN from the Canadian experience with the RADICAL LEFT:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
----------
Did YOU NOT READ the PUBLIC STATEMENT made by the GERMAN IPCC OFFICIAL?

I will REPEAT IT:

FP’s Peter Foster: Canada dodges carbon suicide

"Before he was forced to talk the minority talk, Mr. Harper described climate change as a “socialist plot.” Intriguingly, this fact is now openly acknowledged.

This week, German IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer said in an interview:“[O]ne must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.…One has to free oneself from

the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy any more.”
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/11/18/p...

What part of German IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer's PUBLIC STATEMENT don't you understand?
----------
DID YOU READ the link to the ACTUAL IPCC AR4 REPORT that describes the "Greenhouse Effect" ?

"Where is the AGW "science"?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

We can correctly write the IPCC AR4 Report definition of the Greenhouse Effect as:

Greenhouse Effect: Back Radiation from a Average -20 deg C Atmosphere to a +15 deg C Earth Surface where the Back Radiation is absorbed causing the Earths Surface to warm.
--------
Have you ever seen a COLD Object (like the Atmosphere) ever HEAT-UP a WARMER OBJECT like the Earth's Surface?

It is IMPOSSIBLE as The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics CLEARLY STATES.

“Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is NOT POSSIBLE for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow

spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.”
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

And, there is NOT:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

If YOU think otherwise, then POST A MEASUREMENT!!!

You CAN'T, BECAUSE THE MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST."
----------
It is not a partisan issue, it is a matter of FACT.

Like I said, If YOU think otherwise, then POST A MEASUREMENT!!!
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#31113 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
For your information Canada has been and is moving AWAY From Socialism while the USA has RADICALLY changed under the OBAMA administration.
Yes, during the Pierre Trudeau era, who was a COMMUNIST, and Maurice Strong (CFO of Petro Canada) placed in charge of the attempt to NATIONALIZE the Canadian OIL INDUSTRY, Canada was SOCIALIST.
The complete story is HERE, read it and LEARN from the Canadian experience with the RADICAL LEFT:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
----------
Did YOU NOT READ the PUBLIC STATEMENT made by the GERMAN IPCC OFFICIAL?
I will REPEAT IT:
FP’s Peter Foster: Canada dodges carbon suicide
"Before he was forced to talk the minority talk, Mr. Harper described climate change as a “socialist plot.” Intriguingly, this fact is now openly acknowledged.
This week, German IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer said in an interview:“[O]ne must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.…One has to free oneself from
the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy any more.”
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/11/18/p...
What part of German IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer's PUBLIC STATEMENT don't you understand?
----------
DID YOU READ the link to the ACTUAL IPCC AR4 REPORT that describes the "Greenhouse Effect" ?
"Where is the AGW "science"?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
We can correctly write the IPCC AR4 Report definition of the Greenhouse Effect as:
Greenhouse Effect: Back Radiation from a Average -20 deg C Atmosphere to a +15 deg C Earth Surface where the Back Radiation is absorbed causing the Earths Surface to warm.
--------
Have you ever seen a COLD Object (like the Atmosphere) ever HEAT-UP a WARMER OBJECT like the Earth's Surface?
It is IMPOSSIBLE as The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics CLEARLY STATES.
“Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is NOT POSSIBLE for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow
spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.”
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...
And, there is NOT:
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH
If YOU think otherwise, then POST A MEASUREMENT!!!
You CAN'T, BECAUSE THE MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST."
----------
It is not a partisan issue, it is a matter of FACT.
Like I said, If YOU think otherwise, then POST A MEASUREMENT!!!
Useless scientific science fiction useless babble.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#31114 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to agree with ObamaSux on this. I'm quite surprised by this comment. Why would you suggest that he was black? Or any other race?
Wrong PHD. Your issue to think (Not really) such a thing. The phd with useless babble racist statements like the above are from a poser or one like you that can't handle the truth is your scientific science is fiction. Now you and "obamasux are two of a kind brain dead useless fecal matter.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31115 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSux-- what exactly is wrong with you? You keep bringing up everything except the actual science. You keep quoting people but youre not actually discussing the science. This is a scientific issue. And there is more than enough science behind it to prove it. Perhaps you should actually try to read some of the peer reviewed studies and not Drudge Report.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31116 Jan 22, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong PHD. Your issue to think (Not really) such a thing. The phd with useless babble racist statements like the above are from a poser or one like you that can't handle the truth is your scientific science is fiction. Now you and "obamasux are two of a kind brain dead useless fecal matter.
First of all perhaps if you didn't resort to personal attacks people would listen to you. Or are you just a troll? Secondly I believe that global writing is happening. However I don't agree when people make racist statements and you made several.

The first attack you claimed ObamaSux was black and then suggested that that's why slavery existed. If it's true and there's an imposter saying these things then what be so defensive? Just say it wasnt you.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#31117 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
ObamaSux-- what exactly is wrong with you? You keep bringing up everything except the actual science. You keep quoting people but youre not actually discussing the science. This is a scientific issue. And there is more than enough science behind it to prove it. Perhaps you should actually try to read some of the peer reviewed studies and not Drudge Report.
More useseless babble cut and paste scientific science fiction.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31118 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
ObamaSux-- what exactly is wrong with you? You keep bringing up everything except the actual science. You keep quoting people but youre not actually discussing the science. This is a scientific issue. And there is more than enough science behind it to prove it. Perhaps you should actually try to read some of the peer reviewed studies and not Drudge Report.
WTF do you think The 2nd Law of Thermodymics is?...chopped LIVER?

Did YOU ACTUALLY READ the link to the ACTUAL IPCC AR4 REPORT that describes the "Greenhouse Effect" ?

"Where is the AGW "science"?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

----------
What OTHER SCIENCE do you have in mind?

ANSWER THE QUESTION instead of constantly BABBLING!

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31119 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
<quoted text>
A couple of scientists writing condescending emails doesn't make global warming fiction. The earth is clearly warming. Scientist just didn't pull this out of thin air. Extensive research has gone into this. They're not just repeating what they hear from political pundits on tv. Papers have been written, years of research, ice core samples going back hundreds of thousand years.
I did a science experiment on this as a middle schooler in the 1980s of the effects CO on a closed sphere. If a middle schooler can figure that out, why cant you? People have known about for this for decades. That's a heck of a long time to keep a hoax going.
Also, the big question is why? Why would thousands of scientists perpetrate a hoax of this nature? Especially a hoax that is so gloomy? It makes no sense. What do they have to gain collectively?
I'll tell you who has to gain, the polluters, oil and gas companies, and the people they contribute to. They have everything to gain to make people look the other way. Now, I'm still a republican for many reasons, but the GOP really needs to wake up to this issue. Stop letting the D's control common sense with regard to this issue.
Once again, you're making WAY too much sense here for people like SUX/Gord. He'll never, ever admit how wrong he is.

Yes, there are a lot of people who oppose AGW/CC for financial reasons. 8 of the largest 12 companies in the world (by revenue) are oil companies, 2 are auto manufacturers, one is a utility & the other is WalMart.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global...

They all have strong financial interests in AGW/CC denial. Even WalMart is highly dependent on energy-intensive transportation at both the wholesale & retail level. WalMart isn't the corner store where you can walk in, buy this or that & carry it home. They have fleets of trucks to keep their stores stocked.

In theory, auto manufacturers MIGHT support AGW/CC theory, but only if much higher CAFE standards mean they can sell more cars. It requires strong government action independent of oil companies.(Recall that the Bushes AND Cheney were oilmen.)

I'm sorry, but today's Republican Party will NEVER abandon these well-monied interests. They'll always represent the oil (& other fossil fuels) companies & their money. There is a TINY chance that Democrats will represent the people, science, common sense & the truth, but an awful lot of Demos are oil company lackeys also.

The money & power that oppose AGW/CC at all costs are truly staggering. They even have their paid shills on fora like this. It will be very, very difficult for scientific fact & common sense to prevail.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31120 Jan 22, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks,

Here is a PHYSICS paper (not a AGW FRAUD PAPER) that describes EXACTLY what I have been talking about!

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics.
International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No. 3 (30 January 2009), 275-364

The abstract states:

"The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861, and Arrhenius 1896, and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively
equilibrated to the atmospheric system."

AND...

"According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist.

Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation."

GERHARD GERLICH and RALF D. TSCHEUSCHNER, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B23, 275 (2009). DOI: 10.1142/S021797920904984X
FALSIFICATION OF THE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 GREENHOUSE EFFECTS WITHIN THE FRAME OF PHYSICS
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.114...
----------
Do you SEE "According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist" ???

Or, are you simply REFUSING to accept that the AGW CULT could not EVER DECEIVE the Public....like Berney Madoff?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#31121 Jan 22, 2013
More useseless babble cut and paste scientific science fiction

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31122 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>

They keep on repeating the same old AGW CRAP every DAY and can NEVER post ANY MEASUREMENTS.
Why don't you just ADMIT that THERE ARE NO MEASUREMENTS and stop making a FOOL of YOURSELF over and over and over and over.....like a broken record.

"Barbra Streisand told Diane Sawyer that we're in a global warming crisis, and we can expect more and more intense storms, droughts and dust bowls. But before they act, weather experts say they're still waiting to hear from Celine Dion." --Jay Leno
"Arnold Schwarzenegger is blaming man for global warming. And today, Al Gore agreed with him. That's so typical. Two cyborgs,'Oh, let's blame the humans.'" --Jay Leno
"According to Time magazine, global warming is 33% worse than we thought. You know what that means? Al Gore is one-third more annoying than we thought." --Jay Leno
"Al Gore announced he is finishing up a new book about global warming and the environment. Yeah, the first chapter talks about how you shouldn't chop down trees to make a book that no one will read." --Conan O'Brien
"Experts say this global warming is serious, and they are predicting now that by the year 2050, we will be out of party ice." --David Letterman
"At a press conference yesterday NASA announced that 2005 was the hottest year on record. It is so hot, and global warming is so bad, if the presidential election were held today, Al Gore would still lose." --Jay Leno
"According to a new U.N. report, the global warming outlook is much worse than originally predicted. Which is pretty bad when they originally predicted it would destroy the planet." --Jay Leno
SUXObama

Congratulations! You actually posted something useful, some jokes that were funny. The grim reality of AGW/CC calls out for humor so we can face the awful truth.

As to measurements, Wallop10 posted 29 scientific references chock full of measurements, & I re-posted them. Do you need us to quote the text of every single article?

You're unable to refute them, which means your rants & name-calling with the caps lock key on, & your reposts of your previous nonsensical rants, mean absolutely nothing. I dare you. Read ONE paper & try to refute what it says. One out of 29. I'll even let you pick the paper.

I already refuted your nonsensical "scientific" paper, BTW. Radiative forcing does NOT work like a heat pump & does NOT violate the Second Law. Not that you'd ever admit you're wrong, though.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31123 Jan 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, you're making WAY too much sense here for people like SUX/Gord. He'll never, ever admit how wrong he is.
Yes, there are a lot of people who oppose AGW/CC for financial reasons. 8 of the largest 12 companies in the world (by revenue) are oil companies, 2 are auto manufacturers, one is a utility & the other is WalMart.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global...
They all have strong financial interests in AGW/CC denial. Even WalMart is highly dependent on energy-intensive transportation at both the wholesale & retail level. WalMart isn't the corner store where you can walk in, buy this or that & carry it home. They have fleets of trucks to keep their stores stocked.
In theory, auto manufacturers MIGHT support AGW/CC theory, but only if much higher CAFE standards mean they can sell more cars. It requires strong government action independent of oil companies.(Recall that the Bushes AND Cheney were oilmen.)
I'm sorry, but today's Republican Party will NEVER abandon these well-monied interests. They'll always represent the oil (& other fossil fuels) companies & their money. There is a TINY chance that Democrats will represent the people, science, common sense & the truth, but an awful lot of Demos are oil company lackeys also.
The money & power that oppose AGW/CC at all costs are truly staggering. They even have their paid shills on fora like this. It will be very, very difficult for scientific fact & common sense to prevail.
Sorry to interupt your Cult Rant, but maybe "Joe Bob Attacts" would be interested in how you have stated:

"That is, THE ATMOSPHERE HELPS THE SUN WARM THE EARTH, even though it's significantly cooler than the surface. This is a scientific fact. There are not just thousands, but many millions,perhaps billions, of measurements that support this."

Why don't you EXPLAIN why YOU have NOT BEEN ABLE TO POST EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT and have been RUNNING FOR THE HILLS ?

Come on, EXPLAIN WHY?
----------
Pay attention "Joe Bob Attacts" and you will see the AGW CULT IN ACTION.

Watch and LEARN.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31124 Jan 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
SUXObama
Congratulations! You actually posted something useful, some jokes that were funny. The grim reality of AGW/CC calls out for humor so we can face the awful truth.
As to measurements, Wallop10 posted 29 scientific references chock full of measurements, & I re-posted them. Do you need us to quote the text of every single article?
You're unable to refute them, which means your rants & name-calling with the caps lock key on, & your reposts of your previous nonsensical rants, mean absolutely nothing. I dare you. Read ONE paper & try to refute what it says. One out of 29. I'll even let you pick the paper.
I already refuted your nonsensical "scientific" paper, BTW. Radiative forcing does NOT work like a heat pump & does NOT violate the Second Law. Not that you'd ever admit you're wrong, though.
Why don't you EXPLAIN why YOU have NOT BEEN ABLE TO POST EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT and have been RUNNING FOR THE HILLS ?

Come on, EXPLAIN WHY?
----------
Pay attention "Joe Bob Attacts" and you will see the AGW CULT IN ACTION.

Watch and LEARN.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31125 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
Joe Bob Attacks,
Here is a PHYSICS paper (not a AGW FRAUD PAPER) that describes EXACTLY what I have been talking about!
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics.
International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No. 3 (30 January 2009), 275-364
The abstract states:
"The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861, and Arrhenius 1896, and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively
equilibrated to the atmospheric system."
AND...
"According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist.
Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation."
GERHARD GERLICH and RALF D. TSCHEUSCHNER, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B23, 275 (2009). DOI: 10.1142/S021797920904984X
FALSIFICATION OF THE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 GREENHOUSE EFFECTS WITHIN THE FRAME OF PHYSICS
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.114...
----------
Do you SEE "According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist" ???
Or, are you simply REFUSING to accept that the AGW CULT could not EVER DECEIVE the Public....like Berney [sic] Madoff?
SUXObama,
We already explained this. Radiative forcing in the atmosphere does NOT act like a heat pump. EMR is NOT in equilibrium like they suggest because different wavelengths are coming in vs those going out (VL in, IR out).

2 deranged scientists who can't appreciate scientific facts are not our problem. After all,~3% of climatologists don't accept the consensus view. You can always find OCCASIONAL disagreement.

The models don't agree on a lot of things, including how much temps will rise with doubled atmospheric CO2. The disagreements are in the feedbacks. So?

Scientific facts are true no matter how much you want them to be false.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#31126 Jan 22, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to interupt your Cult Rant, but maybe "Joe Bob Attacts" would be interested in how you have stated:
"That is, THE ATMOSPHERE HELPS THE SUN WARM THE EARTH, even though it's significantly cooler than the surface. This is a scientific fact. There are not just thousands, but many millions,perhaps billions, of measurements that support this."
Why don't you EXPLAIN why YOU have NOT BEEN ABLE TO POST EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT and have been RUNNING FOR THE HILLS ?
Come on, EXPLAIN WHY?
----------
Pay attention "Joe Bob Attacts" and you will see the AGW CULT IN ACTION.
Watch and LEARN.
More useless babble scientific science fiction.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31127 Jan 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
SUXObama,
We already explained this. Radiative forcing in the atmosphere does NOT act like a heat pump. EMR is NOT in equilibrium like they suggest because different wavelengths are coming in vs those going out (VL in, IR out).
2 deranged scientists who can't appreciate scientific facts are not our problem. After all,~3% of climatologists don't accept the consensus view. You can always find OCCASIONAL disagreement.
The models don't agree on a lot of things, including how much temps will rise with doubled atmospheric CO2. The disagreements are in the feedbacks. So?
Scientific facts are true no matter how much you want them to be false.
Why don't you EXPLAIN why YOU have NOT BEEN ABLE TO POST EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT and have been RUNNING FOR THE HILLS ?

Come on, EXPLAIN WHY?
----------
Pay attention "Joe Bob Attacts" and you will see the AGW CULT IN ACTION.

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min southerngirl 1,660,630
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 4 min cpeter1313 322,468
News Democrats silent on whether Trump should resign... 6 min Julia 148
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 6 min youareadufus 47,520
News Prince Harry interviews Barack Obama 6 min Chilli J 34
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 19 min Chicagoan by Birth 1,512
News Tax bill boosts oil, gas drilling a " and renew... 25 min Solarman 16
More from around the web