Go Back  

Global Warming Cancelled 

Current Rating:

Join NowJoin Now
 
  #1  
Old 02-09-2012, 12:05 AM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:230
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Global Warming Cancelled

Breaking Global Warming Taboos

'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'
Quote:
Will reduced solar activity counteract global warming in the coming decades? That is what outgoing German electric utility executive Fritz Vahrenholt claims in a new book. In an interview with SPIEGEL, he argues that the official United Nations forecasts on the severity of climate change are overstated and supported by weak science.

The articulate utility executive is nervous at the beginning of the conversation. He is groping for words -- not a common occurrence for the practiced provocateur. After all, Fritz Vahrenholt, 62, who holds a doctorate in chemistry, has been a rebel throughout his life. "Perhaps it's just part of my generation," he says.

He is typical of someone who came of age during the student protest movement of the late 1960s, and who fought against the chemical industry's toxic manufacturing plants in the 1970s. His party, Germany's center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), chose him as environment senator in the city-state of Hamburg, where he incurred the wrath of the environmental lobby by building a waste incineration plant, earning him the nickname "Feuerfritze" (Fire Fritz). He worked in industry after that, first for oil multinational Shell and then for wind turbine maker RePower, which he helped develop. Now, as the outgoing CEO of the renewable energy group RWE Innogy, he is about to embark on his next major battle. "I'm going to make enemies in all camps," he says.

He wants to break a taboo. "The climate catastrophe is not occurring," he writes in his book "Die Kalte Sonne" (The Cold Sun), published by Hoffmann and Campe, which will be in bookstores next week.

He has only given the book to one climatologist, Jochem Marotzke, the director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, to read prior to its publication. Marotzke's assessment is clear: Vahrenholt represents the standpoints of climate skeptics. "A number of the hypotheses in the book were refuted long ago," Marotzke claims, but adds, on a self-critical note, that his profession has neglected to explain that global temperatures will not increase uniformly. Instead, says Marotzke, there could also be phases of stagnation and even minor declines in temperature. "This has exposed us to potential criticism," he says.

While books by climate heretics usually receive little attention, it could be different in Vahrenholt's case. "His fame," says Marotzke, "will ensure that there will be a debate on the issue."

The book is a source of discomfort within Vahrenholt's party. No one with the SPD leadership is willing to comment on the theories of their prominent fellow party member, from former Environment Minister and current SPD Chairman Sigmar Gabriel to parliamentary floor leader Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who was given an advance copy of the book.

A lecture Vahrenholt was scheduled to give at the University of Osnabrück in northwestern Germany was recently cancelled. (Political Censorship?)

SPIEGEL: Mr. Vahrenholt, in the week before last, you made the surprising announcement that you are resigning as head of RWE Innogy. And now your book "Die Kalte Sonne," in which you deny the climate catastrophe, is appearing. Were you forced to step down because your ideas could damage RWE's new green image?

Vahrenholt: No. My contract would have expired at the end of the year, anyway. Besides, I will continue to be a member of the company's supervisory board for another three years.

SPIEGEL: How have your fellow executives responded to your provocative prediction that it will get colder instead of warmer in the coming decades?

Vahrenholt: This is not an RWE book. Aside from CEO Jürgen Grossmann, I didn't give an advance copy to anyone in the company. Grossmann, at any rate, found it so engrossing that he read the entire book in one night.

SPIEGEL: Nevertheless, your precipitous withdrawal from RWE management is reminiscent of the scandal surrounding Thilo Sarrazin, who was forced to resign from the board of Germany's central bank in 2010 following the publication of his controversial book on immigration and integration.

Vahrenholt: This isn't a precipitous withdrawal. Besides, I don't need Thilo Sarrazin as a role model. I also didn't need a role model when I drew attention to risks in the chemical industry in my 1978 book "Seveso ist überall" (ed's. note: Seveso is Everywhere -- a reference to the infamous Seveso chemical spill in 1976 in Italy). Today, I want new scientific findings to be included in the climate debate. It would then become clear that the simple equation that CO2 and other man-made greenhouse gases are almost exclusively responsible for climate change is unsustainable. It hasn't gotten any warmer on this planet in almost 14 years, despite continued increases in CO2 emissions. Established climate science has to come up with an answer to that.

SPIEGEL: You are an electric utility executive by profession. What prompted you to get involved in climatology?

Vahrenholt: In my experience as an energy expert, I learned that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is more of a political than a scientific body. As a rapporteur on renewable energy, I witnessed how thin the factual basis is for predictions that are made at the IPCC. In one case, a Greenpeace activist's absurd claim that 80 percent of the world's energy supply could soon be coming from renewable sources was assumed without scrutiny. This prompted me to examine the IPCC report more carefully.

SPIEGEL: And what was your conclusion?

Vahrenholt: The long version of the IPCC report does mention natural causes of climate change, like the sun and oscillating ocean currents. But they no longer appear in the summary for politicians. They were simply edited out. To this day, many decision-makers don't know that new studies have seriously questioned the dominance of CO2. CO2 alone will never cause a warming of more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century. Only with the help of supposed amplification effects, especially water vapor, do the computers arrive at a drastic temperature increase. I say that global warming will remain below two degrees by the end of the century. This is an eminently political message, but it's also good news.

SPIEGEL: You make concrete statements on how much human activity contributes to climatic events and how much of a role natural factors play. Why don't you publish your prognoses in a professional journal?

Vahrenholt: Because I don't engage in my own climate research. Besides, I don't have a supercomputer in my basement. For the most part, my co-author, geologist Sebastian Lüning, and I merely summarize what scientists have published in professional journals -- just as the IPCC does. The book is also a platform for scientists who apply good arguments in diverging from the views of the IPCC. The established climate models have failed across the board because they cannot cogently explain the absence of warming.

SPIEGEL: You claim that the standstill has to do with the sun. What makes you so sure?

Vahrenholt: In terms of the climate, we have seen a cyclical up and down for the last 7,000 years, long before man began emitting CO2 into the atmosphere. There has been a warming phase every 1,000 years, including the Roman, the Medieval and the current warm periods. All of these warm periods consistently coincided with strong solar activity. In addition to this large fluctuation in activity, there is also a 210-year and an 87-year natural cycle of the sun. Ignoring these would be a serious mistake …


SPIEGEL: … but solar researchers are still in disagreement over whether the cycles you mention actually exist. What do you think this means for the future?

Vahrenholt: In the second half of the 20th century, the sun was more active than it had been in more than 2,000 years. This "large solar maximum," as astronomers call it, has contributed at least as much to global warming as the greenhouse gas CO2. But the sun has been getting weaker since 2005, and it will continue to do so in the next few decades. Consequently, we can only expect cooling from the sun for now.

SPIEGEL: It is undisputed that fluctuations in solar activity can influence the climate. Most experts assume that an unusually long solar minimum, evidenced by the very small number of sunspots at the time, led to the "Little Ice Age" that began in 1645. There were many severe winters at the time, with rivers freezing over. However, astrophysicists still don't know the extent to which solar fluctuations actually affect temperatures.

Vahrenholt: Many scientists assume that the temperature changes by more than 1 degree Celsius for the 1,000-year cycle and by up to 0.7 degrees Celsius for the smaller cycles. Climatologists should be putting a far greater effort into finding ways to more accurately determine the effects of the sun on climate. For the IPCC and the politicians it influences, CO2 is practically the only factor. The importance of the sun for the climate is systematically underestimated, and the importance of CO2 is systematically overestimated. As a result, all climate predictions are based on the wrong underlying facts.

SPIEGEL: But you are doing exactly what you criticize climatologists of doing: Using a thin body of data, you make exact predictions. In your book, you estimate the sun's influence on the climate down to the last 0.1 degrees. No one can do that.
Looks like Vahrenholt just did!

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to johnleeknoefler For This Useful Post:
rockman49, Sharon
  #2  
Old 02-09-2012, 12:28 AM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:230
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows

Meltwater from Asia's peaks is much less then previously estimated, but lead scientist says the loss of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern

Damian Carrington

guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 8 February 2012 13.10 EST



Hopar glacier in Pakistan. Melting ice outside the two largest caps - Greenland and Antarctica - is much less then previously estimated, the study has found. Photograph: Paula Bronstein/Getty Images


The world's greatest snow-capped peaks, which run in a chain from the Himalayas to Tian Shan on the border of China and Kyrgyzstan, have lost no ice over the last decade, new research shows.

The discovery has stunned scientists, who had believed that around 50bn tonnes of meltwater were being shed each year and not being replaced by new snowfall.

The study is the first to survey all the world's icecaps and glaciers and was made possible by the use of satellite data. Overall, the contribution of melting ice outside the two largest caps – Greenland and Antarctica – is much less then previously estimated, with the lack of ice loss in the Himalayas and the other high peaks of Asia responsible for most of the discrepancy.

Bristol University glaciologist Prof Jonathan Bamber, who was not part of the research team, said: "The very unexpected result was the negligible mass loss from high mountain Asia, which is not significantly different from zero."

The melting of Himalayan glaciers caused controversy in 2009 when a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly stated that they would disappear by 2035, instead of 2350. However, the scientist who led the new work is clear that while greater uncertainty has been discovered in Asia's highest mountains, the melting of ice caps and glaciers around the world remains a serious concern.

"Our results and those of everyone else show we are losing a huge amount of water into the oceans every year," said Prof John Wahr of the University of Colorado. "People should be just as worried about the melting of the world's ice as they were before."

His team's study, published in the journal Nature, concludes that between 443-629bn tonnes of meltwater overall are added to the world's oceans each year. This is raising sea level by about 1.5mm a year, the team reports, in addition to the 2mm a year caused by expansion of the warming ocean.

The scientists are careful to point out that lower-altitude glaciers in the Asian mountain ranges – sometimes dubbed the "third pole" – are definitely melting. Satellite images and reports confirm this. But over the study period from 2003-10 enough ice was added to the peaks to compensate.

The impact on predictions for future sea level rise is yet to be fully studied but Bamber said: "The projections for sea level rise by 2100 will not change by much, say 5cm or so, so we are talking about a very small modification." Existing estimates range from 30cm to 1m.

Wahr warned that while crucial to a better understanding of ice melting, the eight years of data is a relatively short time period and that variable monsoons mean year-to-year changes in ice mass of hundreds of billions of tonnes. "It is awfully dangerous to take an eight-year record and predict even the next eight years, let alone the next century," he said.

The reason for the radical reappraisal of ice melting in Asia is the different ways in which the current and previous studies were conducted. Until now, estimates of meltwater loss for all the world's 200,000 glaciers were based on extrapolations of data from a few hundred monitored on the ground. Those glaciers at lower altitudes are much easier for scientists to get to and so were more frequently included, but they were also more prone to melting.

The bias was particularly strong in Asia, said Wahr: "There extrapolation is really tough as only a handful of lower-altitude glaciers are monitored and there are thousands there very high up."

The new study used a pair of satellites, called Grace, which measure tiny changes in the Earth's gravitational pull. When ice is lost, the gravitational pull weakens and is detected by the orbiting spacecraft. "They fly at 500km, so they see everything," said Wahr, including the hard-to-reach, high-altitude glaciers.

"I believe this data is the most reliable estimate of global glacier mass balance that has been produced to date," said Bamber. He noted that 1.4 billion people depend on the rivers that flow from the Himalayas and Tibetan plateau: "That is a compelling reason to try to understand what is happening there better."

He added: "The new data does not mean that concerns about climate change are overblown in any way. It means there is a much larger uncertainty in high mountain Asia than we thought. Taken globally all the observations of the Earth's ice – permafrost, Arctic sea ice, snow cover and glaciers – are going in the same direction."

Grace launched in 2002 and continues to monitor the planet, but it has passed its expected mission span and its batteries are beginning to weaken. A replacement mission has been approved by the US and German space agencies and could launch in 2016.

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to johnleeknoefler For This Useful Post:
rockman49, Sharon
  #3  
Old 02-09-2012, 03:20 AM
BryanXavier's Avatar
BryanXavier
Offline:
Fiscally Irresponsible
Poster Rank:72
Male
Join Date: Dec 2009
Contributions: 1
 
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Quoted: 4828 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
13/20 14/20
Today Posts
1/11 ssss13013
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

I read these too John,

Climate change became a religion to environmentalists which is what bothered me the most. I and many other lay-people saw the graphs and cyclical tendencies for warming and thought "Why don't they ever bring this up in the debates?"

Sun spots or no sun spots, there is a cycle.

Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BryanXavier For This Useful Post:
johnleeknoefler, rockman49, Sharon
  #4  
Old 02-09-2012, 11:04 AM
thissiteisfuckedup's Avatar
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:396
Male
Join Date: Feb 2009
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 16/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1836
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)

Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years

Quote:
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
Quote:
Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.
Quote:
According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a 92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe fell by 2C.

However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder), between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’ when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze solid.


Quote:
Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant influence of greenhouse gases.’

These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.

‘World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help.’

He pointed out that, in claiming the effect of the solar minimum would be small, the Met Office was relying on the same computer models that are being undermined by the current pause in global-warming.

CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to ‘come roaring back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998.


Quote:
So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid.

‘The ten-year projection remains groundbreaking science. The period for the original projection is not over yet,’ he said.

Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.

‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories,’ he said.

He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.

‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists ‘are not surprised’.


Quote:
She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

‘They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global climate,’ said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past, such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle ‘flipped’ back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also thought likely to flip in the next few years .

Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans – not CO2 – caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.

The same goes for the impact of the sun – which was highly active for much of the 20th Century.

‘Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment,’ he said. ‘Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-made CO2, or by natural variability.’

Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen by more than half a degree, as the cold ‘La Nina’ effect has re-emerged in the South Pacific.

‘We’re now well into the second decade of the pause,’ said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. ‘If we don’t see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious.
Source:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz1kxQ85zqC

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to thissiteisfuckedup For This Useful Post:
johnleeknoefler, rockman49
  #5  
Old 02-09-2012, 11:25 AM
ices's Avatar
ices
Offline:
My Rank: MASTER GUNNERY SERGEANT
Poster Rank:240
Male
Join Date: Mar 2010
 
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Quoted: 662 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
4/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3660
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

You do know an entire industry has sprung up in order to reduce global emissions?

In other words, idiotic policies in countries like the UK help to strangulate the economy and make it worse for consumers.

No matter how many people try to debunk it, something I never believed in anyway, there will always be environmentalists spouting out utter crap on what they sipposedly know.

As soon as they started to blame mankind for global changes I just went outside, looked up and said this one thing. "Hmm, that big thing we call the sun doesn't have any effect?"

its a big /facepalm moment.

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ices For This Useful Post:
johnleeknoefler, rockman49
  #6  
Old 02-09-2012, 02:31 PM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:230
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

Quote:
Originally Posted by thissiteisfuckedup View Post
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)

Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years


Hahaha. Love it when someone takes the time to read up and do a little googling before posting. Hate it when retards post personal opinion as fact based on conjecture and bullshit computer models.
Quote:
We’re now well into the second decade of the pause,’ said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. ‘If we don’t see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious.’
ahhaha. Scientists in jail for lying. Don't forget to check who paid them to lie. Thanks for the great graphs. Warmed my little heart. If not the world...
















Source:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz1kxQ85zqC

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-10-2012, 04:19 PM
rageagainstthemac's Avatar
My Rank: PRIVATE
Poster Rank:7491
Male
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssssss15
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

I can still see a drastic change over the last few years here in Newfoundland in the way's our weather and climate are, extreme fluctuation's in our systems, each year we can see a huge change in the amounts of precipitation we receive, in fact I remember being a kid and In early November there's be tonne's and tonne's of snow everywhere, and all the way up to Christmas, but the last 5 years we have had just ONE Christmas where we had our lawns and roads covered in snow, we really haven't been having a white Christmas as of late, now I can't say for sure that this is global warming but I'm certain that our climate and weather is going through drastic changes, and not just here but in lots of places across the world.

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-10-2012, 04:38 PM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:230
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

Quote:
Originally Posted by rageagainstthemac View Post
I can still see a drastic change over the last few years here in Newfoundland in the way's our weather and climate are, extreme fluctuation's in our systems, each year we can see a huge change in the amounts of precipitation we receive, in fact I remember being a kid and In early November there's be tonne's and tonne's of snow everywhere, and all the way up to Christmas, but the last 5 years we have had just ONE Christmas where we had our lawns and roads covered in snow, we really haven't been having a white Christmas as of late, now I can't say for sure that this is global warming but I'm certain that our climate and weather is going through drastic changes, and not just here but in lots of places across the world.
It used to be lots warmer here in San Diego also. Winters are colder now, Summers are cooler. Altogether we had maybe two weeks of warm weather this past summer. When I was a kid working around Bakersfield Ca it would get up to 120 more often than not. Now... Not so much. More rain back then too. I guess the heat makes more evaperation and more of that makes more rain... What a miracle.... We had huge floods when I was a kid as well. And huge weather extremes. I remember huge hail storms. Don't get that so much now either. And tornadoes. Blizzards also. Oh wait.... The climate has always had extremes. Nothing has changed. Back in the thirties there were droughts for years. California had a 7 year drought when I was a kid. For 7 years we had only small drizzles once a year. And ancient Egypt saw a 7 year drought come to think of it.

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-11-2012, 12:25 AM
Pogrom's Avatar
Pogrom
Offline:
★ Server Supporter ★
Poster Rank:511
Male
Join Date: Nov 2011
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 10/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1206
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

Fucking A!!! Cliff Notes! Jesus Christ!!!

__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Disliked This Post By Pogrom:
DeeMarieGK
  #10  
Old 02-11-2012, 01:11 AM
DeeMarieGK's Avatar
DeeMarieGK
Offline:
★ Server Supporter ★
Poster Rank:73
A chick.
Join Date: Jun 2011
 
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 11/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssss12915
Re: Global Warming Cancelled

^^^*rolls eyes*^^^
we are adults here. If you want to understand, read the posts. Too long for you?

Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DeeMarieGK For This Useful Post:
johnleeknoefler

Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2010 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO